Thread: Depressing Quote of the Day -- LEN 3 article

I remember this offseason Ron Gardenhire saying we need to sign quality starting pitching. Now listening to Terry Ryan saying we have numbers of starters it's absolutely priceless.

Originally Posted by USAFChief

I'm no GM, but it seems to me it would be wise to worry about the "planned starting 5" before worrying about potential backups.

Bingo! What hit me yesterday were the comments on the Pirates blog about Correia being fine if you were talking about your 6th or 7th guy for depth but that he shouldn't be part of your "planned 5" as Chief calls them.

He is not only part of Ryan's "planned 5" but I would submit that he is part of Ryan's "planned 3". As I've said elsewhere, I was heartened by the Span and Revere trades. Thus far, I'm disheartened with their planned spending. I would either like to see them acquire a FA starter who would actually be league average or above OR I would like to see them acquire some other pieces that might later be flipped for more prospects (a la Willingham last year although they haven't flipped him yet). So far I just see them spending a bit of money with not very good results. Still in wait and see mode.

Originally Posted by Brock Beauchamp

even crappy ol' Joe is better than nothing.

Why is an ERA+ of 99 over the past four seasons (note that I'm anti-cherry picking by excluding his career year of 2008) crappy? Being league-average is hard to do against very talented competition, and is quite far above replacement level. Joe's no ace, but he can contribute to a winning ballclub, and can help stabilize this one.

Originally Posted by JB_Iowa

So far I just see them spending a bit of money with not very good results. Still in wait and see mode.

I'll get ripped for talking about payroll, but so far I haven't seen them spend even "a bit of money." Basically, they took Span's salary and gave it to Correia. That's not "spending" in my book.

Originally Posted by USAFChief

I'll get ripped for talking about payroll, but so far I haven't seen them spend even "a bit of money." Basically, they took Span's salary and gave it to Correia. That's not "spending" in my book.

Well, you won't get ripped by me. And I appreciate your observation on "reallocation" rather than "spending".

I hope Jim Crikket is on a nice vacation somewhere because I've really missed him on the Twins recent actions (or lack thereof) -- waiting to see if he has another good rant in him if payroll ends up less than $85m.

Is it too early to DFA Correia?[/QUOTE]


Just a bit. I would say they have to wait til the end of February, then it's ok.

Have the Twins ever paid more than $9M for a pitcher or $5M for a shortstop (that's another story)? I know they paid Radke $9M and Pavano $8M. I guess my point is they never paid more than $7M to a FA (Willingham). According to a Tom Powers article, don't expect TR to spend $10 or $15M on one pitcher, expect him to get 3 for that cost. In other words check the FA starters for a couple more guys who won't deserve more than $2M and give them $5M each, those will be the guys rounding out the rotation in 2013.

Who does that leave? Maybe Eric Bedard, Derek Lowe, Kevin Millwood, Jamie Moyer, or Jonathan Sanchez?

Didn't they pay Johan 4/30? I can't remember exactly

The thing is, and this is something that I heard in a discussion on the radio recently that I completely agree with. How many big, free agent deals are realized with the player playing at the same level as previous years over the contract? Not many. Kinda the reason why the Red Sox made that trade with the Dodgers, because they had made some huge signings and none of them were working out. To be honest, the signing of Josh Willingham by the Twins has been probably one of the most underrated and yet one of the biggest FA signings over the last few years with how it went during the first year.

Originally Posted by SydneyTwinsFan

Didn't they pay Johan 4/30? I can't remember exactly

Maybe, but they first acquired him in the Rule 5 draft.

Originally Posted by SydneyTwinsFan

Didn't they pay Johan 4/30? I can't remember exactly

You're right, that's the highest. Actually they paid him 4/$39M in 2005, so there's your high point, 2007 - $12M before the trade. In 2008 he was scheduled to make $13.25M. When he was traded, the Mets redid his contract and he made $19M fr that season.

Originally Posted by J-Dog Dungan

Originally Posted by SydneyTwinsFan

Didn't they pay Johan 4/30? I can't remember exactly

Maybe, but they first acquired him in the Rule 5 draft.

No, they didn't acquire Johan Santana in the Rule 5.

Originally Posted by Boom Boom

No, they didn't acquire Johan Santana in the Rule 5.

Hair, consider yourself split.

Originally Posted by snepp

Originally Posted by Boom Boom

No, they didn't acquire Johan Santana in the Rule 5.

Hair, consider yourself split.

I'm not sure, but if I recall correctly, by taking Camp and trading him to the Marlins for Santana (instead of just drafting Santana), the Marlins agree to pay the Twins the $50,000 rule 5 fee.

Which isn't significant in any way, but sort of a neat little story, IMO. Santana was not only a rule 5 pick, but a completely free one at that.

I believe your recollections to be correct.

Originally Posted by whydidnt

Of course, based upon Mr. Ryan's track record regarding FA pitchers we really shouldn't be surprised. I'm really starting to wonder if he really is as stubborn about pitching as some of us only thought. It's almost like he brings in guys like Correia, Marquis, Martinez, Ponson, etc. to prove the paying Free Agents doesn't work. It seems he finds joy in being contrary and purposely finding guys with low strike out rates. I may have missed one, but I am pretty sure that Diamond had the lowest K/9 rate among LH qualifiers and Correia had the lowest rate among RH Qualifiers last year. If only we could add a couple more soft tossers to the mix that would solve everything!

Ryan is the disciple of PtoC. He definately wants to succeed using "unconventional" philosophy and typically has viewed pitchers as "necessary evils". The Twins do believe in premier closers but are very wary of premier starters because of the cost and risk factors. The Twins do believe that fans are far more likely to view a premier hitter as their favorite than a pitcher. Hitters are viewed as "heroes" (they do "positive" things) and pitchers are "anti-heroes" (the adversary). Hitters tend to play nearly every game, pitchers do not. So they prefer to pay for hitters as opposed to pitchers.

Originally Posted by Shane Wahl

I don't trust LaVelle to know what is going on, honestly, but I don't see what else the Twins could actually be planning. I wish I knew whether or not the Twins were simply not going to get Marcum or Jackson based on the fact that the team has sucked the past two years and those pitchers want to go to a contender. If that is the case, oh well. If not, and if the Twins chose to pay Correia and some other joke like Lannan money instead of further pursuing quality pitching, then something is dramatically wrong with the front office. I have to wonder if the excuse is going to be like last year: "well one good pitcher wasn't going to make us a contender, so we decided not to spend that money" blah blah blah blah.

I say no to Saunders. I would have taken him over nothing before they went out and threw money in the garbage for Correia. Now, they really had better just hold on instead of adding more jokers. I would rather let Hendriks have at it then replace him with Saunders.

It's a sad state of affairs when the thought of acquiring Saunders is in reality the best move they have left in their quiver. The cold reality is they could easily have a rotation including both Saunders and Hendirks. Combined with Diamond, Correia and Whorley. There's still no guarantee from the club that Gibson is in from Day One. Given the fact that they are punting on 2013 (is there anyone still left arguing otherwise?), there is an argument to be made to bring Gibson back slowly, possibly with a June call-up or relief duty, regradless, they have already strongly voiced favoring limiting of his innings, so why not a start in the bullpen or in Rochester?

Originally Posted by JB_Iowa

Bingo! What hit me yesterday were the comments on the Pirates blog about Correia being fine if you were talking about your 6th or 7th guy for depth but that he shouldn't be part of your "planned 5" as Chief calls them.

He is not only part of Ryan's "planned 5" but I would submit that he is part of Ryan's "planned 3". As I've said elsewhere, I was heartened by the Span and Revere trades. Thus far, I'm disheartened with their planned spending. I would either like to see them acquire a FA starter who would actually be league average or above OR I would like to see them acquire some other pieces that might later be flipped for more prospects (a la Willingham last year although they haven't flipped him yet). So far I just see them spending a bit of money with not very good results. Still in wait and see mode.

I've been a strong advocate for flipping as the best way to rebuild for years, the Twins are missing multiple opportunities over the last two seasons and this off-season to do as much.

Originally Posted by JB_Iowa

Well, you won't get ripped by me. And I appreciate your observation on "reallocation" rather than "spending".

I hope Jim Crikket is on a nice vacation somewhere because I've really missed him on the Twins recent actions (or lack thereof) -- waiting to see if he has another good rant in him if payroll ends up less than $85m.

$85M prediction nearly got me tarred and feathered. I'm already rethinking my prediction needs to go lower. When Jim Crikket and the birdwatcher end up engaging in some mutual Twins ripping, I'll know when to recalibrate my final guess.