I love the sound of faking Glass.

Maybe they shouldn't have signed Guthrie to a totally nutsoid contract, then.

Maybe they shouldn't have signed Guthrie to a totally nutsoid contract, then.

Or traded for a $12 million version of Ervin Santana.

Yeah, not computing. Glass doesn't let the ML payroll get to $65 M if he's only gonna let them spend $57 M. He's also not gonna let them re-sign Guthrie or trade for Santana ($13 M - $1). And why would there be talk about the Royals being willing to trade prospects for established (and therefore "expensive") starting pitching. There's also the problem clearing $9 M of payroll space this year would require dumping Gordon or Butler (or Santana) and we'd have surely heard about that by now. My guess is Glass meant a "$70 M ML payroll" or maybe $80 M all up (meaning they have nothing left to spend). Unless his last investment went kablooey yesterday.

I mean I don't have a lot of faith in Moore but I'm confident somebody in the Royals' FO knows how to add and that $65 > $56. Ohhh ... maybe it was a typo!

I do note the Guthrie contract has an interesting 5/11/9 structure so there's some clear attempt to keep costs down this year.

Always the low-budget leader. Always.

(Cue series of "race-to-the-bottom" posts and imitations of Rany having apoplectic fits...)

I love the sound of faking Glass.

The payroll does seem a bit lowe.

Doesn't each team get $50M per year under the new National TV deals? Perhaps Mr. Glass' enormous salary (and that of numerous family members?) is a drag on the payroll.

Obviously, it is a great system for Glass --guaranteed profit with no incentive to spend money to improve the product.

The payroll does seem a bit lowe.

Just another case of Royals fans being nutted by reality.

So how long before the vultures come swooping in? I'm sure other teams drool at the thought of Alex Gordon and Billy Butler being available. Of course, given those are fairly good deals for the club they'd be foolish to trade them but one never knows.

the cutbacks are not just in kc. the brewers owner has told doug melvin his payroll for 2013 is 80 million which is down about 20 or so from last year

I love the sound of faking Glass.

Great, now I'm going to have that stupid song in my head all morning.

Dutton has since amended the story to say he got wrong information from the club.

http://www.kansascity.com/2012/12/06/3951887/royals-payroll-pinch-is-tighter.html

Club officials said Thursday that the $70 million payroll figure encompasses the entire 40-man roster — not merely the 25-man roster on Opening Day. The difference between the payrolls for the 25-man and 40-man rosters is roughly $3 million. So far, the Royals are projected to spend $68 million on their 40-man roster.

On Wednesday night, club officials said that the $70 million figure included not only the 40-man roster, but also signing-bonus limits for the draft and international spending. That made the situation look especially bleak: Spending on the draft and international signings is roughly budgeted at $10 million, which would’ve left the Royals $8 million in the red.

Club officials later corrected those figures, saying draft and international spending is not included in the payroll.

Royals being willing to trade prospects for established (and therefore "expensive") starting pitching.

I had a thought this morning about all the trade rumors going around. Why not trade Wil Myers for Trevor Bauer? Not sure if other pieces would be involved. Maybe that's what all of the three ways are hinting at I guess.

I would love Bauer, but his unorthodox pitching regiment would likely clash with their traditional thinking. IIRC, there were rumors he asked the Royals not to draft him because of this.

I would love Bauer, but his unorthodox pitching regiment would likely clash with their traditional thinking. IIRC, there were rumors he asked the Royals not to draft him because of this.

I'm sure he gave that information to all potential suitors before the draft, so I wonder what happened with the Diamondbacks to prompt their about-face on Bauer.

@14 What about any of the other top pitching prospects like Cole or whoever. A straight prospect swap would at least solve the salary and years under contract issues better than a Lester or Shields.

16 - I agree. There was some talk maybe of Jeremy Hellickson (who is not a prospect) or James Paxton (who is a prospect, but not nearly enough) or Danny Hultzen (better, but still not good enough for Myers). I think someone here mentioned Myers for Jarrod Parker which might be an interesting swap.

Doesn't each team get $50M per year under the new National TV deals?

I've made this boo-boo a few times too ... the new money doesn't actually start arriving until 2014. Also it's about a $25-30 M per year increase over the current deal.

I think someone here mentioned Myers for Jarrod Parker which might be an interesting swap

I did and as an A's fan I'm all for it even though Myers would be the A's 6th OF and Parker the #1 or #2 pitcher right now. I always believe in trading pitchers for outfielders. If they need another starter they can still sign McCarthy, Oswalt or Villanueva or somebody like that. They've got Straily, Gray and Peacock in AAA, and they would likely trade Young and/or Smith for something....maybe a SS but maybe a pitcher too. Plus Beane can always pull another Moscoso or Saarloos out of his hat.

16 - I agree. There was some talk maybe of Jeremy Hellickson (who is not a prospect) or James Paxton (who is a prospect, but not nearly enough) or Danny Hultzen (better, but still not good enough for Myers). I think someone here mentioned Myers for Jarrod Parker which might be an interesting swap.

Myers for Hellickson seems like a reasonable deal for both teams.