PDA

View Full Version : Money Can't Buy You ---



Riverbrian
07-26-2012, 11:40 PM
The Cubs, Mets, Mariners, Astros are 4 teams off the top of my head that went out and agressively spent money on their club and failed. Maybe the Marlins will join this list after their splurge this past off season. All 4 teams have gone through a lengthy cleanup and with the possible exception of the Mets... They are still cleaning up.

Do the Twins belong on this list. Payroll shot up with the opening of Target field. The team got away from using the farm and spent for quicker answers. It did seem to be a change in philosophy. Did the Twins take their eye off the minor league ball and look for that quick fix?

The Twins seem to be looking at possibly spending some cash just to get some pitching for 2013. Does this become a repeating cycle?

Kobs
07-26-2012, 11:47 PM
The Cubs, Mets, Mariners, Astros are 4 teams off the top of my head that went out and agressively spent moneyn on their club and failed. Maybe the Marlins will join this list after their splurge this past off season. All 4 teams have gone through a lengthy cleanup and with the possible exception of the Mets... They are still cleaning up.

Do the Twins belong on this list. Payroll shot up with the opening of Target field. The team got away from using the farm and spent for quicker answers. It did seem to be a change in philosophy. Did the Twins take their eye off the minor league ball and look for that quick fix?

The Twins seem to be looking at possibly spending some cash just to get some pitching for 2013. Does this become a repeating cycle?

The Twins' minor league system has been garbage for a lot longer than two years. The payroll is irrelevant.

J-Dog Dungan
07-26-2012, 11:50 PM
Their system hasn't been garbage for too long, they have just had too many injuries to too many pitching prospects to have a good supply line up to the Bigs

USAFChief
07-27-2012, 12:00 AM
The Astros? The Astros have had a payroll over $90m three times in their history, and not since 2010. The highest payroll in team history was $102m in 2009, coming off a year in which they won 86 games.

Seattle has had a payroll over $100m only twice in team history, and not since 2008, coming off a year in which they won 88 games. Their 2012 payroll is less than their payroll was in 2003.

Neither of these teams have "aggressively spent money" in recent history.

Shane Wahl
07-27-2012, 12:38 AM
The Twins topping $100 million next season, due to spending on pitching, would vastly improve the team. I am not sure how it became the case that so many people around here have ignored the importance of starting pitching. With decent starting pitching this year, the Twins are a .500 team.

Highabove
07-27-2012, 05:27 AM
The Twins topping $100 million next season, due to spending on pitching, would vastly improve the team. I am not sure how it became the case that so many people around here have ignored the importance of starting pitching. With decent starting pitching this year, the Twins are a .500 team.

Exactly
Spending money WISELY is very powerful. There could be as much as 20+ million dollars to spend on starting Pitching next year. That will not take anything
away from growing talent in the Farm system. Some folks, wish to follow in the footsteps of Teams such as Kansas city. The Twins have revenue that the Small markets do not have. Going to Target Field and paying the prices out there is a good reminder. The Twins can rebuild their Farm System while putting out a good product. Its been done. This will probably be the direction Terry Ryan takes.

twinsnorth49
07-27-2012, 07:07 AM
The Twins topping $100 million next season, due to spending on pitching, would vastly improve the team. I am not sure how it became the case that so many people around here have ignored the importance of starting pitching. With decent starting pitching this year, the Twins are a .500 team.

I don't think it's being ignored, a lot of people just don't think it's the only problem the Twins should be focused on addressing.

Riverbrian
07-27-2012, 11:52 AM
The Astros? The Astros have had a payroll over $90m three times in their history, and not since 2010. The highest payroll in team history was $102m in 2009, coming off a year in which they won 86 games.

Seattle has had a payroll over $100m only twice in team history, and not since 2008, coming off a year in which they won 88 games. Their 2012 payroll is less than their payroll was in 2003.

Neither of these teams have "aggressively spent money" in recent history.

The Mariners payroll jumped from 18th in 1999 and increased to one of only 7 teams over 100 million in 2007. The Bavasi period of Mariners history was aggressive in my opinion. Bringing in Beltre, Sexson, Washburn, Ibanez, Silva and Matt Lawton among others. I think it was a shift in their approach. It doesn't compare to the Yankees free Spending but I think the shift was significant and I think they are still trying to dig their way out of it.


This was off the top of my head... In Hind sight... The Astros may be a poor example. The moves they made did produce a pennant in the 2005. I was just remembering a period of bringing in some bigger names. Pettite, Clemens, Tejada, Carlos Lee.

Scratch the Astro's.

100 Million is a tough bench mark. Not many teams were over 100 million prior to 2008 and I think the lower payroll teams were lower overall.

Anyway, It was a poorly worded Thread starter by me. I was thinking about these teams and I was wondering if a parallel could be drawn with the Twins jump in payroll with the opening of Target Field. Granted... If you spend money and make good decisions... it works out great but... If you don't... Did it put the Mariners, Cubs and Mets in a hole? Does anyone feel the Twins changed their approach with the opening of Target Field? If So... Did it put us in a hole?

diehardtwinsfan
07-27-2012, 12:03 PM
There's a reason Bavasi got fired... most in Seattle think he's the worst GM to ever manage a baseball team... probably worse than Bill Smith. I don't think the Twins are on this list because they aren't tripping over themselves to get big name free agents. They definitely have taken a wiser approach and have managed a few good hits (Willingham, Doumit, and Burton) to one real disaster (Marquis).

The Astros, if memory serves me right, were contenders and were bringing in pieces to get them over the top. All teams are going to have to do that. Let's just pretend for a second that everything breaks right for MN next season, they'd still likely need a 2B and some pitching help...

The Cubs are good example of that not working too, but with their new GM, I doubt they will be going back to their free spending ways.

Last point, the Twins farm system is partly bad due to injuries, but lets not forget that they had a couple of very bad drafts at the end of the Ryan era. That kind of thing comes and goes to an extent. Bill Smith, like him or hate him, did decently in this area. We will see how Ryan 2 fairs in a couple of years. The system is barren of high end pitching, particularly in the upper levels.

mbents
07-27-2012, 12:20 PM
Was Marquis really a disaster? Yes, he pitched poorly, but it was also a one year contract. One year contracts aren't disasters. Alfonso Soriano is more of a disaster.

ashburyjohn
07-27-2012, 12:23 PM
I am not sure how it became the case that so many people around here have ignored the importance of starting pitching.

I'm not sure who you think is saying the starting pitching either is remotely acceptable, or is unimportant.


With decent starting pitching this year, the Twins are a .500 team.

The Twins are 9th in the AL in run scoring, and closer to the 12th spot than to the 8th. The offense is hardly hopeless and can get better on its own, but at the moment it's not a pennant winning collection. "Decent" starting pitching would have to be well above league average, just to reach .500 with this offense.

CDog
07-27-2012, 01:08 PM
Was Marquis really a disaster? Yes, he pitched poorly, but it was also a one year contract. One year contracts aren't disasters. Alfonso Soriano is more of a disaster.

Agreed. Not only was it a 1-year deal, but it wasn't for all that much in the current landscape. I think a lot of people saying the deal was a disaster are referring only to the actual performance, but $-wise and length-wise, it didn't hurt much.

DPJ
07-27-2012, 01:22 PM
Agreed. Not only was it a 1-year deal, but it wasn't for all that much in the current landscape. I think a lot of people saying the deal was a disaster are referring only to the actual performance, but $-wise and length-wise, it didn't hurt much.

The signing was a disaster cause everyone and there mom knew Marquis has no shot in the AL. Might as well rolled the dice with the anti-christ Slowey for less money and an actually shot at pitching decent.

mbents
07-27-2012, 01:51 PM
The signing was a disaster cause everyone and there mom knew Marquis has no shot in the AL. Might as well rolled the dice with the anti-christ Slowey for less money and an actually shot at pitching decent.

I guess TR should have consulted There Mom before signing Marquis.

mike wants wins
07-27-2012, 01:58 PM
The Twins didn't move away from relying on their farm system, their farm system is/was barren of immediate help. These are not some kind of either/or thing, like so many threads here seem to imply. You can draft well, and sign free agents. The job isn't so hard that you can't figure out how to do both. Can the OP explain why you can't both draft well, and sign free agents? Plus, if you spend a ton of money in 2011, instead of bringing up prospects, those prospects would have been draft in 2005 or or 2006 or so. So I really don't get this at all. But I'm willing to read your logic, and if you make a great argument, even change my mind.

DPJ
07-27-2012, 01:58 PM
I guess TR should have consulted There Mom before signing Marquis.

They could have saved the Twins 4 million dollars with the simple phone call.

Highabove
07-27-2012, 02:14 PM
Small to medium bad deals can add up.

Nishioka 5 million

Marquis 3 million

Blackburn 4.75 million
----------------------

It can be argued that 13 million dollars was thrown down the drain this year.

13 million dollars spent wisely would have brought in ????

snepp
07-27-2012, 02:15 PM
Throw in Capps "reasonable for a proven closer" $4.5 million.

Boom Boom
07-27-2012, 02:17 PM
Throw in Capps "reasonable for a proven closer" $4.5 million.

I think you mean "reasonable" for a "proven closer".

Riverbrian
07-27-2012, 02:44 PM
The Twins didn't move away from relying on their farm system, their farm system is/was barren of immediate help. These are not some kind of either/or thing, like so many threads here seem to imply. You can draft well, and sign free agents. The job isn't so hard that you can't figure out how to do both. Can the OP explain why you can't both draft well, and sign free agents? Plus, if you spend a ton of money in 2011, instead of bringing up prospects, those prospects would have been draft in 2005 or or 2006 or so. So I really don't get this at all. But I'm willing to read your logic, and if you make a great argument, even change my mind.

My Fault... I know what I'm trying to say but struggling to condense it.

I was watching Outfront on CNN... Went to Bed... Instead of thinking about Erin Burnett like every Red Blooded Male should be doing. I picked up my Ipad and started reading Twins Daily and my thoughts turned to the Twins Pitching Situation.

I thought... If the Trade Deadline doesn't net some decent pitching. We may be looking at Free Agent money being spent to address Pitching.

Then my thoughts turned to the Marlins this year and then I thought that Free Agency or just plain spending in general doesn't always work.

The Cubs, Astro's, Met's and Mariners came to my mind. All Clubs that spent themselves into holes.

Then I started thinking that it could be dangerous... Kind of a repeating cycle... If you rely on Big names and big contracts to fill out your roster or are trading young prospects for big names. You have to keep going back to that well.

It seemed clear that the Farm System is really the only way to get your organization healthy...

Then I thought... We Jumped from 24th to 11th in payroll in 2010 and to 9th in 2011. We had a nice 2010... Injuries killed us in 2011 and...

I then started thinking... Was this a shift in previous philosophy... Spending money was never really an option in the Metrodome... Is it possible that this change in philosophy... If it was one... Can be compared to the other 4 clubs. Is there a lesson learned here.

After that thought... I started this thread and explained my thinking poorly. I should have been thinking about Erin Burnett. My Fault.

CDog
07-27-2012, 02:57 PM
They could have saved the Twins 4 million dollars with the simple phone call.

Does it just become second nature at some point to exaggerate, stretch, or lie when the actual facts don't quite support what you're selling? Or is it a conscious choice each time?

DPJ
07-27-2012, 03:02 PM
Does it just become second nature at some point to exaggerate, stretch, or lie when the actual facts don't quite support what you're selling? Or is it a conscious choice each time?

I don't know what the hell you're talking about...but I assume you agree wiith me that Marquis was destined to fail the moment the pen hit the paper on that contract.

mike wants wins
07-27-2012, 03:18 PM
We agree on Erin for sure.....

Kobs
07-27-2012, 06:53 PM
Their system hasn't been garbage for too long, they have just had too many injuries to too many pitching prospects to have a good supply line up to the Bigs

Yes, all of the Twins' amazing pitching prospects have gotten injured.

YourHouseIsMyHouse
07-27-2012, 07:18 PM
Does it just become second nature at some point to exaggerate, stretch, or lie when the actual facts don't quite support what you're selling? Or is it a conscious choice each time?

Ouch. I have noticed the trend too and I must say that was 3rd degree stuff right there!

jorgenswest
07-27-2012, 08:06 PM
This year's payroll is in line with their status as a middle market and revenue team. I agree that it is not the problem or solution.

The solution is to rebuild a farm system that had declined since 2009. It can't be changed on a year but there are some encouraging signs. The organization has some respected prospects at 20 and younger. I understand more money has been put into the system. The coaching changes seem to be going the right direction.

Unfortunately, we won't see the fruits of the system next year. So what will Ryan do?

Will he try to build a .500 team next year by signing some decline phase players to team friendly contracts? I think that was this year's plan. Looks like next year's too. The first move was signing Doumit.

Will he sell high his decline phase player assets with an eye on 2014 and beyond?

We will find out soon.

ashburyjohn
07-27-2012, 09:49 PM
I think you mean "reasonable" for a "proven closer".

"Reasonable", for a "proven" "closer".

kryptik
07-27-2012, 10:20 PM
We agree on Erin for sure.....

Oh yes we do.

johnnydakota
07-27-2012, 11:17 PM
it was the twins way , in signing soft tossing (88-91 mph) pitchers believing that a staff of brad radkes would take them to the promised land and would'nt cost as much as real pitchers.....
not saying brad was a bad pitcher, brad pitched till his arm fell off, but not every pitcher is a brad radke and 5 brad radkes just dont cut it on 1 team .....as for signing and drafting they have done terrible for the last decade only having 1 good season . the twins had a chance to spend money signing international players this spring , and adding to a barren minor leaque , but instead they waited till there was a spending limit...
pohlad will always take the cheap way over and over again . the way rich people get rich is by not spending money, they expect to be over paid ,but short change there own employees.. this off season terry ryan offered all 4 of the twins free agents contract , but each had to take a pay cut .....only matt "the crapper" accepted this is the twins way....

diehardtwinsfan
07-28-2012, 07:42 AM
The problem is that there was 1 Brad Radke. Guys like him walk a fine line. He did it for a career, but far more fail than succeed.

Brandon
07-28-2012, 10:37 AM
Our current state of the team comes down to a few defining trades more than anything.
Santana to the Mets eventually helped us get pieces needed in 2010 but afterwards we have virtually nothing to show for it. Santana hamstrung us on that trade so it doesn't hold as much weight as some of the others.

Garza and Bartlet for Young. This one hurt as we could have recieved sooo much more for Garza had we just been patient.

JJ Hardy for nothing.

Wilson Ramos for Capps. This one is allieviated a little since Doumit has performed and is relatively inexpensive. But we could have a more useful piece for Ramos too.

These trades happened at the same time the team wasn't gaining etra draft picks for losing players to FA and the team was drafting lower due to the previous years record.

These things resulted in us not replenishing our farm system fully. I bet we have a deep farm system again within 2 years because of trades, higher drafting spot, extra draft picks, and larger international budgets.

mike wants wins
07-28-2012, 10:41 AM
No, the current state of the team comes down to not having any impact players come up from the minors in the last 3-4 years. Not one pitcher, and a bunch of maybes in Valencia, Revere, and Plouffe. Yes, the trades were awful, but the farm system has been pretty much useless. This is due to awful drafting and developing, not just bad trades.

Also, they signed Marquis and Capps, instead of using that money to sign a legit starting pitcher. Also, they didn't trade veterans last year when they had the chance. So far, it sounds like they are being unrealistic in their demands this year, we'll see in a few days.

But this is largely a problem with drafting (and the Garza trade, which is the worst of all of those trades).