Change Starts at the Top

[Game7-91]

In 2010, as Target Field was set to open its first season, Jim Pohlad was quoted about the Twins future payrolls relative to the previous season's 95 million dollar payroll: “We’re not going to spend the money just to spend the money,” he said. “It wouldn’t hurt if it dropped below, in my opinion, occasionally. But we’re going to try to put the best team on the field in the most prudent financial way. I think we accomplished that this year. At least on paper, we’re getting our money’s worth.”

In 2022, when asked about his franchise's payroll, San Diego Padres principal owner Peter Seidler had this to say: “This is about baseball for me and our organization. Fans never ask me, ‘What do you think about spending that much?’ They never ask me that. They say, ‘Man, I love to go out to see Machado and Tatis and Croney. That’s what I get. Why do it? Did we give up too much? That’s about 10 percent of what I’m thinking. I think, what makes San Diego different than 29 other markets? But we certainly have conviction, there no equivocating about that. The fluidity is always there. We’re an active organization. We love where we’re at."

As the Padres prepare for Game 3 of the NLCS, and their second consecutive season of fielding a highly competitive, legitimate World Series contending roster, I thought it would be interesting to compare the situations of two franchises that are going in dramatically different directions.

In 1984, Carl Pohlad purchased the Minnesota Twins for 44 million dollars. Flash forward to 2022,  and the franchise value has appreciated to a reported 1.4 billion dollars, a roughly 32-fold increase in 38+ years of ownership. Note that the the Pohlad ownership group's estimated net worth is 3.8 billion.

In 2012, a new ownership group consisting of members of the O'Malley baseball family purchased the San Diego Padres for 800 million. Peter Seidler, an O'Malley grandson, emerged as principal owner in 2020. The franchise value has appreciated to a reported 1.5 billion. Seidler's personal net worth is a reported 3 billion.

Franchise revenues, as estimated by Statista, reports the Padres with 282 million in revenue in 2021, and the Twins with 268 million. In 2019, both franchises generated revenues of 297 million. The Padres play in Petco Park, built with public funds and opened in 2004, six years prior to Target Field opening, but of a similar generation of stadium design and capacity. Both teams retain rights to revenues from concessions and suites. (Remember, this was a significant argument in favor of building Target Field-the Twins revenues would jump significantly , and therefore payroll, because of the additional concessions and suites revenues from Target Field, which the Twins did not receive at the Metrodome.)

In 2020, when Seidler assumed control of the franchise. San Diego was situated nationally as the 27th ranked metro area in TV market share (Minneapolis/St Paul ranked 14th). And yet, the Padre's payroll coming into this season started at 218 million, 5th highest in MLB, and after the Soto trade in August, probably at or slightly above the 230 million CBT level. The Padres' payrolls have increased since 2019 from 74 to 230 million and from 24th in MLB to 5th. The Twins have increased from 113 to 137 million in the same period, and from 18th to 17th in MLB.

We have spent much time and digital ink on TD debating the finer points of creating a 2023 payroll within the constraints of the Twins way of doing business. But we are never addressing the elephant in the room. The Twins way of doing business is not working. It has not worked for 30 years. Here is Jim Pohlad again, from the same MinnPost article, on the status of the roster coming into 2010: "And Pohlad stressed that qualifying for postseason alone was no longer good enough for an organization that has lost five consecutive playoff series since 2002, three of them to the Yankees. He even appeared to guarantee a future world championship, without specifying when. “I hear that we’ve got to do better, or get better, so that when we face the Yankees (we’re competitive),” he said. “I hope we’re not a team that’s intimidated by the Yankees. I don’t believe we are. I’m personally not intimidated by the Yankees or the Yankee organization. We just need to, every year, get better, so that whoever we face, that we will be able to advance. “Teams mature. I don’t know where the core of our team is on the maturity level or the peak level, but I don’t think we’re at peak yet. Our core group of players is still very young. The future is very strong, and we will advance past the first round of the playoffs, into the World Series, and to the White House.”

Thirteen years on, what has changed?

That they have loosened the pocketbook ever so slightly for the likes of Correa is not encouraging, given that they did that only after clearing other contracts first. Adding one elite player in isolation, on a heavily hedged one year bet, while not adding equivalent commitments to other areas of the roster, is hardly a sign the Twins are about to join the big boys club. The Twins have the means to do better but simply choose not to do so.

All that said, it is also clear that with AJ Preller the Padre's have a GM who is not afraid to take risks with talent evaluation and acquisition. He developed a farm system that allowed for major trades along the way. But they also were not looking to squeeze pennies for value from every trade, every prospect,  and every FA signing. They swung big, winning some. and losing some. But the overall outcome is undeniably positive, for the franchise, for the city, and for the fans.

I love that Seidler speaks about the fans and what drives their interest in the team. It's about competing, with top-tier talent, and a healthy aversion to risk for the sake of competitiveness. This is not reckless spending. It is analytical in the best sense, recognizing the risk involved, and accepting that risk as the cost of doing business, if one defines the cost of doing business as running an organization that exudes an unyielding commitment to fielding a competitive roster year in and year out. I cannot imagine this type of thinking in the current iteration of One Twins Way. That needs to change if the Twins are going to develop into the consistent contender the fans want and deserve. Change starts at the top.

The Padres drew 2.9 million fans in the 2022 regular season, from a metro population of 1.5 million. The Twins drew 1.8 million fans, from a metro population of 3.7 million. Memo to the Pohlads: spending is its own reward.

 

 

 

[CRF]

In my opinion...and that's all this is, there's a huge philosophical difference between what the Twins are trying to do, and what a lot of other teams are trying to do. The Twins aren't necessarily trying to win a World Series. They're only interested in their profit margin. That's their singular goal. They don't want to do anything to jeopardize that. If they should happen to somehow get to the playoffs, go deep in the playoffs, or win a WS, they'll claim that this was their plan all along and their method(s) worked. Unfortunately, I don't think any of us will see another Twins WS title in our lifetime...I know I won't. No doubt that's depressing, but it won't stop me from being a fan and watching/listening to every game. 

[heresthething]

Outstanding post to expose the Pohlad's for how they run this team.  "We're getting our money's worth" says it all.  

[chpettit19]

Really, really nice post here. Appreciate the numbers provided. It's the difference between having a baseball team for a business and having a baseball team to be competitive. I hate the Yankees, but part of that is jealousy over having an owner for so long who was legitimately just doing whatever he could to win.

There are pretty clearly 2 camps of owners in MLB. 1 camp includes the Pohlads and are owners who run their teams like any other business. Willing to take some financial hits here and there, but never major ones and never for multiple seasons at a time. The other camp includes Seidler and are owners who run their teams to win. They're competitive billionaires trying to show other billionaires they're better at being billionaires. Cohen and the Mets look like they're joining that camp after having been in the "baseball as a business" camp for far to long for their fan's liking. 

The interesting thing to me is profit sharing amongst the owners. It'd be so fascinating to be a fly on the wall in owners meetings and see what the different battle lines are and how the Seidler, Cohen, etc. owners really feel about the other owners just taking their profit sharing money and pocketing it. I'm sure they're somewhat ok with it because it makes it easier for them to win. The best sports leagues in the world are those with uber competitive owners doing whatever it takes to win without any restrictions on spending. It's just really hard to get owners in MLB who will let their FO go wild with the checkbook so we're stuck with a handful going wild as the others sit back and enjoy watching their net worth continue to grow and grow.

[Vanimal46]

We all know why the Twins operate as they do. A vast majority of fans have given up the fight because there is nothing we can do to convince a billionaire how to spend their money.

MLB would be better off having more owners like Steve Cohen and Peter Seidler. They would phase out the bad owners like Robert Nutting and Tom Ricketts. 

[Squirrel]

3 hours ago, CRF said:

In my opinion...and that's all this is, there's a huge philosophical difference between what the Twins are trying to do, and what a lot of other teams are trying to do. The Twins aren't necessarily trying to win a World Series. They're only interested in their profit margin. That's their singular goal. They don't want to do anything to jeopardize that. If they should happen to somehow get to the playoffs, go deep in the playoffs, or win a WS, they'll claim that this was their plan all along and their method(s) worked. Unfortunately, I don't think any of us will see another Twins WS title in our lifetime...I know I won't. No doubt that's depressing, but it won't stop me from being a fan and watching/listening to every game. 

This is not a Twins philosophy. Rays, Guardians, Pirates, Orioles all come to mind off the top of my head. And some of those teams are even worse than the Twins, even though they have managed to be more competitive than the Twins (Rays and Guardians), and I credit superior scouting and analytics for that. But they still have ownerships that are counting pennies and that sell off assets when they become too expensive and/or could get them high end prospects in return. And the Guardians have yet to win a WS in how long? Are we more forgiving of them because of late they've gotten to the playoffs and have a manager that everyone likes? Their business practices are still the same, and sometimes worse. Even the Cubs are all about the money and business. I really dislike what the ownership there is about.

And then you have teams who go out and spend, and do it poorly or to inconsistent results. White Sox and Rangers come to mind there.

That said, I am frustrated with this ownership and how they manage their business. But there is little I can do about it except manage my own expectations, or, perhaps, just stop following the team for now. They have ROOM to spend and won't. 

[tony&rodney]

2 hours ago, Game7-91 said:

All that said, it is also clear that with AJ Preller the Padre's have a GM who is not afraid to take risks with talent evaluation and acquisition. He developed a farm system that allowed for major trades along the way. But they also were not looking to squeeze pennies for value from every trade, every prospect,  and every FA signing. They swung big, winning some. and losing some. But the overall outcome is undeniably positive, for the franchise, for the city, and for the fans.

This is (to me) the key difference between the Twins and Padres. People can argue the markets but it should generally be possible for the Twins to roster a team around $150 million. I don't believe that the money is the difference as much as the tentative nature of our front offices. Acquiring talent requires risks and the Twins seem to struggle with anxiety at every move which results in moves that appear safe.

To be fair to the folks like Falvey, perhaps other teams have scant interest in Twins players or their prospects. That would then necessitate an overhaul of the drafting, signing, and developmental systems. I don't know.

Most folks plans for 2023 include all of Gray, Mahle, and Maeda as key parts to the starting rotation. San Diego has gambled in bringing aboard guys like Darvish, Musgrove, Snell, Clevinger, Manaea, and Vincent as starters. Not all have worked out. The first three all have that high upside lacking in any of the Twins starters. I do think the Twins will roll with what they have but wouldn't it be nice to sign one risky pitcher like Rodon and trade for a couple of others who have upside like Pablo Lopez and Edward Cabrera. Just pay the price and take a chance. The roster doesn't need to cost that much but some gambles and risks are inherent in winning.

[Rosterman]

Appear to be competitive, at least in your division. If you win the division and advance, looks good. But, still, profit is the key!

[Bigfork Twins Guy]

Very informative article comparing two organizations apples to apples.  The article highlights the similarities but also discusses the differences in philosophies.  When watching the playoffs this year it is even more evident how far we really are from competing in the playoffs.

The Padres drew 2.9 million fans in the 2022 regular season, from a metro population of 1.5 million. The Twins drew 1.8 million fans, from a metro population of 3.7 million

IMO the above is the most important difference highlighted in the post.  I heard some complaints from management about a dwindling attendance this year for the Twins, but look at SD who put a quality team on the field.  Their fans have been noticed and passionate during these playoffs.

We do not need to go all-in towards the super high risk model, but definitely need to take a step up.  I'd say increasing the payroll to 150-175MM would be a good start.

[gunnarthor]

The Pohlad's suck. I don't think anyone disagrees with this. Fans still despise Carl Pohlad and he's been dead for, what?, fifteen years? It's a ****** family. And all of our GMs have had to deal with this. It would be great if the Pohlad family just went away but they won't. So Falvey and Levine have to deal with the same issue that Ryan and Smith had to deal with - find a way to be competitive despite - not because of - ownership. 

Good owners are rare and bad owners - especially in baseball - have really hurt the game. As bad as the NFL is, teams are competitive (Lions excepted, of course) and that makes their product so much better. 

[Richie the Rally Goat]

16 minutes ago, Bigfork Twins Guy said:

Very informative article comparing two organizations apples to apples.  The article highlights the similarities but also discusses the differences in philosophies.  When watching the playoffs this year it is even more evident how far we really are from competing in the playoffs.

The Padres drew 2.9 million fans in the 2022 regular season, from a metro population of 1.5 million. The Twins drew 1.8 million fans, from a metro population of 3.7 million

IMO the above is the most important difference highlighted in the post.  I heard some complaints from management about a dwindling attendance this year for the Twins, but look at SD who put a quality team on the field.  Their fans have been noticed and passionate during these playoffs.

We do not need to go all-in towards the super high risk model, but definitely need to take a step up.  I'd say increasing the payroll to 150-175MM would be a good start.

https://www.si.com/fannation/bringmethesports/twins/after-disappointing-season-twins-president-disappointed-fans-are-disappointed?src=rss

CRF shared the link earlier this year. DSP laid it out nicely, the fans should just be happy to have a team at all. 
 

fascinating way to act, I can’t imagine any business being successful with that attitude
 

[wabene]

Very good post! A bitter pill to swallow, unfortunately. Seidler Equity Partners is a venture capital outfit, maybe? Not bankers I presume. Certain professions seem to attract certain types.

The Twins spending the last few years has been ALMOST in line with their market size. The preceding years with 6 out of 7 years of 90 loses, however, had payrolls well below what their market size would dictate. I remember this well and I'm sure I'm not alone. I've been defending this front office and rooting for this team, but after reading this it's hard to be positive.

 

[Game7-91]

20 minutes ago, wabene said:

Seidler Equity Partners is a venture capital outfit, maybe? Not bankers I presume. Certain professions seem to attract certain types.

Yes, they are. That is a really interesting point. I do not doubt the working culture of each organization informs its processes and evaluates its outcomes in very different ways.

[ashbury]

I'm concerned about the health of the game.  And at the professional level that means all the franchises need to be healthy.

League wide, winning is necessarily a zero-sum game.  But franchise health is not thus constrained; there is no similar logic that forbids all 30 teams from being better embraced by their respective communities in 2023 than in 2022.  For a sport to be healthy, it follows that winning can't be the only thing each team sells, even if the pursuit of winning is the point of the competition.  The quote from Padres ownership seems to get this.  St Louis and Milwaukee are also franchises whose ballpark attendance figures (which along with broadcast fees serve as proxy for overall community engagement) are healthier than our Twins'; similar analysis of how they market themselves should be studied.

The Moneyball approach provides short term gains that business people are trained to seek, through roster churn and relentless attention to the bottom line.  Fans are invited to play Armchair GM by rooting for profits.  Examples of Tampa and Oakland as Moneyball successes happen to coincide with financial floundering.  It's well known that the Twins were in the running to be the team that the Moneyball book would focus on, and their financial status seems to be a mixed bag at best.  And then to add insult to injury, Dave St Peter recently scolded the fans by implication for the poor financial results and implied payroll cuts are on the horizon; that POV has it just about exactly backwards for branding/marketing purposes.

Every team has at least a bit of roster churn over the course of years.  But purposely aiming to sell assets when they are at peak value, such as Ryan Pressly and Jose Berrios, and signing 4-inning starters like Archer and Bundy,, has to be done carefully or you lose more than you gain and the team becomes overly hard to market.

[wsnydes]

There's a very stark difference between ownership groups that enjoy being owners of a baseball, or any professional sports franchise really, and those that see it as another business.  A business that is essentially a license to print money.  It's very obvious which ones love the competitive nature of it and do what they can to win.  They have fun in doing so.  And over the long haul, they're going to make money regardless.  Those that see it as another business treat it as just another business and do what it takes to make money.  I don't necessarily "blame" them because not everyone likes sports and that's fine, but it definitely takes away from the fan and it probably doesn't maximize profits over the long haul either.  Sure, it minimizes loss, but that only nets you so much on the top end too.  There's more than one way to skin a cat.  I for one, am very jealous of those teams that have owners that treat their franchise more as a hobby than a business interest.

[wsnydes]

7 minutes ago, ashbury said:

I'm concerned about the health of the game.  And at the professional level that means all the franchises need to be healthy.

League wide, winning is necessarily a zero-sum game.  But franchise health is not thus constrained; there is no similar logic that forbids all 30 teams from being better embraced by their respective communities in 2023 than in 2022.  For a sport to be healthy, it follows that winning can't be the only thing each team sells, even if the pursuit of winning is the point of the competition.  The quote from Padres ownership seems to get this.  St Louis and Milwaukee are also franchises whose ballpark attendance figures (which along with broadcast fees serve as proxy for overall community engagement) are healthier than our Twins'; similar analysis of how they market themselves should be studied.

The Moneyball approach provides short term gains that business people are trained to seek, through roster churn and relentless attention to the bottom line.  Fans are invited to play Armchair GM by rooting for profits.  Examples of Tampa and Oakland as Moneyball successes happen to coincide with financial floundering.  It's well known that the Twins were in the running to be the team that the Moneyball book would focus on, and their financial status seems to be a mixed bag at best.  And then to add insult to injury, Dave St Peter recently scolded the fans by implication for the poor financial results and implied payroll cuts are on the horizon; that POV has it just about exactly backwards for branding/marketing purposes.

Every team has at least a bit of roster churn over the course of years.  But purposely aiming to sell assets when they are at peak value, such as Ryan Pressly and Jose Berrios, has to be done carefully or you lose more than you gain and the team becomes overly hard to market.

Yes, the St. Peter quote is beyond tone deaf.  Biting the hand that feeds you doesn't help things.  Put something together that's worth investing time and money into and I'll do so.  Shaming me because I'm not finding the product enjoyable and entertaining just tells me the fan, that he's not getting the hint.  Perhaps he's part of the problem too.

[Richie the Rally Goat]

19 minutes ago, wsnydes said:

Yes, the St. Peter quote is beyond tone deaf.  Biting the hand that feeds you doesn't help things.  Put something together that's worth investing time and money into and I'll do so.  Shaming me because I'm not finding the product enjoyable and entertaining just tells me the fan, that he's not getting the hint.  Perhaps he's part of the problem too.

Is it fair to see DSP as an extension of the Pohlad family?

[wsnydes]

11 minutes ago, Richie the Rally Goat said:

Is it fair to see DSP as an extension of the Pohlad family?

I think so.  He's running their business for them and he's been there since Carl owned the team, IIRC.  

It's certainly not unfair, in my view.  If the Pohlads didn't like what he was doing, he wouldn't still be there.

[Trov]

I am not saying the Twins are spending close to what they are brining in, maybe they are, maybe they are not, as the money they make is not made public.  I would like to make a few comments though a few things posted.  First, you compare the Padres with the Twins based on media market.  In a vacuum that may make sense, but how many major sports franchise play in the San Diego media market?  I could be wrong, but pretty just now just the Padres.  How many play in the Twin Cities?  Four, and if you count the MLS team that is five.  That is a lot more sports entertainment money being fought over, than just baseball.  Meaning if a family budget a set amount of money to be spent on going to sporting events, in MN there is a lot more teams pulling for that money, but San Diego has little competition.  

That aside, as much as I would love the owners to drop a ton of money and spend like crazy, simply because their net worth on other businesses would allow for that, I cannot blame them for wanting to make money as a business and not lose it.  Until we see the books of the Twins on what they bring in all revenue and spend out on all expenses, because there is a lot more on expenses than just MLB player payroll, then I will be willing to make judgment calls on how they run the business.  I would wager they could spend more on players in the budget, so not defending them on that point, but people own businesses to make money, they do not lose money to make others happy, because then they will not be in business long. 

[chpettit19]

32 minutes ago, wsnydes said:

Yes, the St. Peter quote is beyond tone deaf.  Biting the hand that feeds you doesn't help things.  Put something together that's worth investing time and money into and I'll do so.  Shaming me because I'm not finding the product enjoyable and entertaining just tells me the fan, that he's not getting the hint.  Perhaps he's part of the problem too.

I think it's hard to say St. Peter is part of the problem, but I certainly don't think he's part of the solution. As you said in your previous post, it's hard to "blame" the Pohlads or St. Peter for running the Twins like a business, but it's certainly frustrating. But, as for St Peter, he's just doing his job to the best of his abilities. The Pohlads tell him the marks they want to hit in profits and he gives the FO a budget based on that.

[chpettit19]

5 minutes ago, Trov said:

I am not saying the Twins are spending close to what they are brining in, maybe they are, maybe they are not, as the money they make is not made public.  I would like to make a few comments though a few things posted.  First, you compare the Padres with the Twins based on media market.  In a vacuum that may make sense, but how many major sports franchise play in the San Diego media market?  I could be wrong, but pretty just now just the Padres.  How many play in the Twin Cities?  Four, and if you count the MLS team that is five.  That is a lot more sports entertainment money being fought over, than just baseball.  Meaning if a family budget a set amount of money to be spent on going to sporting events, in MN there is a lot more teams pulling for that money, but San Diego has little competition.  

That aside, as much as I would love the owners to drop a ton of money and spend like crazy, simply because their net worth on other businesses would allow for that, I cannot blame them for wanting to make money as a business and not lose it.  Until we see the books of the Twins on what they bring in all revenue and spend out on all expenses, because there is a lot more on expenses than just MLB player payroll, then I will be willing to make judgment calls on how they run the business.  I would wager they could spend more on players in the budget, so not defending them on that point, but people own businesses to make money, they do not lose money to make others happy, because then they will not be in business long. 

This is all very true (I even thought about mentioning the competition for fandom in SD vs Minneapolis), but it doesn't make being a Twins fan any less frustrating. Keep your calm thoughts to yourself! I'm obviously kidding, but only kinda.

[wsnydes]

1 minute ago, chpettit19 said:

I think it's hard to say St. Peter is part of the problem, but I certainly don't think he's part of the solution. As you said in your previous post, it's hard to "blame" the Pohlads or St. Peter for running the Twins like a business, but it's certainly frustrating. But, as for St Peter, he's just doing his job to the best of his abilities. The Pohlads tell him the marks they want to hit in profits and he gives the FO a budget based on that.

That's true.  "Problem" probably isn't the right term, but I basically see him as one in the same with the Polhads to an extent.  Just as DSP is doing his job, the Polhads are running their business as they see fit.  I don't really consider the Polhads a "problem" either, it's their philosophy that is at issue.  That may seem like semantics, but just because I don't blame them for anything, that doesn't mean that I have to like it either.  

[Fire Dan Gladden]

7 hours ago, Game7-91 said:

In 1984, Carl Pohlad purchased the Minnesota Twins for 44 million dollars. Flash forward to 2022,  and the franchise value has appreciated to a reported 1.4 billion dollars, a roughly 32-fold increase in 38+ years of ownership.

...

The Twins way of doing business is not working. It has not worked for 30 years.

Unfortunately the Twins way of doing business has worked.  At least it has for the Pohlad family.  

Everyone who complains about the Twins not spending money on huge contracts needs to read this article.  Not to sway their opinion, but to make them understand.  Being a Twins fan means you need to accept that the Pohlad family treats the Twins like a business.  Period.  Making money, not winning, is their sole purpose.  Once you accept this, you can move forward 

[Richie the Rally Goat]

1 hour ago, Trov said:

I am not saying the Twins are spending close to what they are brining in, maybe they are, maybe they are not, as the money they make is not made public.  I would like to make a few comments though a few things posted.  First, you compare the Padres with the Twins based on media market.  In a vacuum that may make sense, but how many major sports franchise play in the San Diego media market?  I could be wrong, but pretty just now just the Padres.  How many play in the Twin Cities?  Four, and if you count the MLS team that is five.  That is a lot more sports entertainment money being fought over, than just baseball.  Meaning if a family budget a set amount of money to be spent on going to sporting events, in MN there is a lot more teams pulling for that money, but San Diego has little competition.  

San Diego is less than two hours from LA where there are Angels, Dodgers, Kings, Ducks, Clippers, Lakers, Chargers, Rams and LAFC. In San Diego? No…. But 9 other pro sports franchises are close enough to pull San Diegan’s dollars away.

I do not buy the “only game in town” bit in the least.

[nicksaviking]

Obviously I want the Twins to spend more money, but this is a huge beware of what you wish for situation. There's about 10 teams in markets significantly bigger than Minnesota. Among the rest of the have-nots, the Twins tend to always be in the middle to top of the pack in spending. Just about every other team seems comfortable slumming it for a few years finding themselves in the bottom 5 or 10 teams in payroll, while the Twins have rarely done that. Sure, being St. Louis or San Diego (at the moment) would be fantastic, but being Pittsburgh, or most of the other regularly low spending teams would be a disaster.

Not defending ownership, just pointing out that most teams have much more to complain about than we do in this department.

[Game7-91]

3 hours ago, Trov said:

I am not saying the Twins are spending close to what they are brining in, maybe they are, maybe they are not, as the money they make is not made public.  I would like to make a few comments though a few things posted.  First, you compare the Padres with the Twins based on media market.  In a vacuum that may make sense, but how many major sports franchise play in the San Diego media market?  I could be wrong, but pretty just now just the Padres.  How many play in the Twin Cities?  Four, and if you count the MLS team that is five.  That is a lot more sports entertainment money being fought over, than just baseball.  Meaning if a family budget a set amount of money to be spent on going to sporting events, in MN there is a lot more teams pulling for that money, but San Diego has little competition.  

That aside, as much as I would love the owners to drop a ton of money and spend like crazy, simply because their net worth on other businesses would allow for that, I cannot blame them for wanting to make money as a business and not lose it.  Until we see the books of the Twins on what they bring in all revenue and spend out on all expenses, because there is a lot more on expenses than just MLB player payroll, then I will be willing to make judgment calls on how they run the business.  I would wager they could spend more on players in the budget, so not defending them on that point, but people own businesses to make money, they do not lose money to make others happy, because then they will not be in business long. 

The points you raise are fair ones. It is true SD is a one-trick pony with only the Padres in town, and the competition for pro sports $$ is not apples to apples in the comparison. But its also true SD is 1/2 the size of the MSP market, the Twins have the summer months to themselves (save for the Lynx) , and as RRG points out sports fans in So Cal have the LA market to choose from as well as SD. SD does have an advantage of being the only team in town. I'm not certain that difference is very significant in their outcomes though.

You also bring up a great point on the "books"....all of us have to work from assumptions about revenues and expenses because the accounting and financial recordings are all private, so my judgments are conditioned by an underylying ignorance of the actual finances. MLB does not even publish break-downs of the revenue sharing pie.

But what we do know is that both stadiums in SD and MSP were publicly financed , in part, and further subsidized by tax exemptions and credits that accrue to the benefit of the ownership group for many years after the construction of the stadium. These benefits do not accrue to the taxpaying public, just the opposite. IMHO, the fact of public financing should result in mandatory public financial and accounting statements from every pro sports team that uses public subsidies to build new stadiums/arenas. The taxpaying public has an interest in how the subsidized funds are used to benefit the community as a whole. Once that happens, (which is, never) we wont have to make conjectural arguments.

It's all very very frustrating.

[wabene]

Very good topic and reasoned discussion, huzzah! 

[heresthething]

16 hours ago, ashbury said:

And then to add insult to injury, Dave St Peter recently scolded the fans by implication for the poor financial results and implied payroll cuts are on the horizon; that POV has it just about exactly backwards for branding/marketing purposes.

St. Peter is the first one that has to go.  Any owner that actually cared about the fans and properly marketing the team would have dropped him right then.  

[Original_JB]

I remember an interview with Carl Pohlad and his sons a little while after Eloise had passed.  The interviewer was asking about her legacy, and how much she loved the team and game, and Carl was giving the interview and started talking about his years of ownership,  how he wouldn't be around forever, and how the team would one day be the sons' to own/run. The looks of disdain and disinterest on Jim and Bill's faces as he said that told me all I needed to know.  They aren't baseball fans....at all.  I gotta believe it makes DSP and the FO job all that much harder when the sole interest is in the +/- on the ledger sheet.  And maybe that's what makes it so hard to be a fan here, the utter indifference shown by ownership in how the team performs. From a purely business standpoint, I can't really complain too much about how the team is run/paid for, but wouldn't it feel much better, even if all financials were exactly the same, to see the ownership living and dying with the team like the fans do? To see that they actually cared? Not saying to always just throw more money at things, but the 'meh, whatever' attitude about being an owner is just a buzzkill. I guess what I want is an owner who WANTS to own a baseball team.

[weitz41]

Really good post. The difference between business and pleasure owners is pretty obvious when you look at payroll.

Very aggressive trades play a large part in the Padres success and much higher payroll. Their entire (playoff) starting staff is from trades and are pretty well compensated. If I'm paying $15 for a beer I want Darvish pitching 7 innings not Archer for 4 innings.