Thread: ESPN: Twins Optimal Year Of Contention is 2016

Originally Posted by ThePuck

The '87 team...took them 5 years. So, yeah, 2 years in basically right away...and we'd need to have almost all of them perform up to our high expectations by then to be maybe be contenders.

They were also 81-81 in '84. Looking at the pitching staffs they sported prior to '86, I think we at least have the promise of performing better than those within two or three years. I'd be more encouraged if we could add one SP in the Jackson/Sanchez mold during that time. I understand your pessimism, but things can get better quickly as evidenced in '90 and '91. I realize we have sunk further than '90 at this point, but I don't think it has to take five years to turn this around. Anyways, I'm not sure why I'm wasting my breath, since I have no chance of changing your mind.

Originally Posted by TheLeviathan

Well, I seriously thought we'd have a 90M payroll next year...how'd that turn out? At this point negativity was what was served to us this offseason, not much baseless about it.

Meh. Draw what reckless conclusions you will. But not spending 90 million in what obviously the team considers a rebuilding year is hardly reason to think that the payroll will be 60 million in 2015/16. It's totally baseless negativity, no matter how many naysayers line up in this thread.

I just wonder who will be leading the team in 2016. Mauer may end being worth his contract, but he clearly has no interest in a leadership role in the clubhouse. And it seems to me that this team is a bit quick to equate a little "fire" with too much "attitude" when it comes to young players. Maybe I'm wrong, but I can't imagine that any Gardenhire-led team is capable of bringing home the league pennant or WS trophy, even if the players you all reference turn out to be the '27 Yankees. I still love the Twins, but I can share none of the optimism here -- at least until team chemstry or culture changes.

Originally Posted by PseudoSABR

Meh. Draw what reckless conclusions you will. But not spending 90 million in what obviously the team considers a rebuilding year is hardly reason to think that the payroll will be 60 million in 2015/16. It's totally baseless negativity, no matter how many naysayers line up in this thread.

The Twins could easily have a 60 million dollar payroll as soon as next year. Twenty one million comes off the Books with Morneau, Pelfrey and Carroll's contracts. If Willingham is traded, that would put the payroll into the 50's.

Originally Posted by Highabove

The Twins could easily have a 60 million dollar payroll as soon as next year. Twenty one million comes off the Books with Morneau, Pelfrey and Carroll's contracts. If Willingham is traded, that would put the payroll into the 50's.

And Blackburn's contract as well

Originally Posted by PseudoSABR

Meh. Draw what reckless conclusions you will. But not spending 90 million in what obviously the team considers a rebuilding year is hardly reason to think that the payroll will be 60 million in 2015/16. It's totally baseless negativity, no matter how many naysayers line up in this thread.

The only baseless thing is your need to diminish opinions by slapping a "negative" label on them. Truth is Ryan has never made big contract splashes during his tenure. That is just the truth. We have 20 some million reasons to be justifiably wary of celebrating available payroll. Until it is actually spent (and spent wisely - looking at you Corriea) there is plenty to base that on. So definitionally your entire point here is just smug nonsense.

Originally Posted by drjim

It will be. Payrolls go down during rebuilds but will go up if some of the prospects reach their potential and need to get paid after they complete their arb years. Twins might not spend a whole lot in free agency but they have proven that they are willing to sign their own players as they approach free agency and this will be especially true with Target Field. One of the reasons the payroll is sluggish right now is that they haven't developed a good player that they needed to extend in several years. Hopefully with this wave coming that will change.

Yup just ask kubel,cuddy and nathan ....

Originally Posted by PseudoSABR

Meh. Draw what reckless conclusions you will. But not spending 90 million in what obviously the team considers a rebuilding year is hardly reason to think that the payroll will be 60 million in 2015/16. It's totally baseless negativity, no matter how many naysayers line up in this thread.

I believe you are correct sir.
I also believe players salarys
will increase 25% over the next 3 years
so im sure it will be closer to 75 million in 2016

Originally Posted by Physics Guy

Anyways, I'm not sure why I'm wasting my breath, since I have no chance of changing your mind.

That's not the case with me at all...when presented with a strong counterargument based on actual trends or stats or something close to pretty strong evidence, I'll change my opinion...or at least be open to the fact I could be wrong. Truth is, for me, it's about getting to the truth. If I'm wrong and I'm shown to be wrong, I'll happily admit it..especially in a case like this where it'd mean we were much better than I think we'll be.

Unfortunately you haven't presented that.

Originally Posted by johnnydakota

Yup just ask kubel,cuddy and nathan ....

That wasnt from a lack of offer. And the team spent the unused money on replacements.

Originally Posted by drjim

That wasnt from a lack of offer. And the team spent the unused money on replacements.

But payroll dropped by 18M....those three got a combined 27M in 2011.

When talking about future payroll why is it a foregone conclusion Morneau won't be on it?

If he is healthy next year there is a decentw chance be signs a midyear extension instead of getting traded. I would welcome that if the price is right.

Originally Posted by TheLeviathan

The only baseless thing is your need to diminish opinions by slapping a "negative" label on them. Truth is Ryan has never made big contract splashes during his tenure. That is just the truth. We have 20 some million reasons to be justifiably wary of celebrating available payroll. Until it is actually spent (and spent wisely - looking at you Corriea) there is plenty to base that on. So definitionally your entire point here is just smug nonsense.

Pot meet kettle

Originally Posted by ThePuck

But payroll dropped by 18M....those three got a combined 27M in 2011.

The team also lost 99 games and I always heard the 2011 payroll was a stretch. Nathan wanted a contender, Kubel wanted out of Target Field and Cuddyer wanted out. Barring a huge overpay they were gone.

When the Twins were good and players wanted to sign they stayed. The exception is the second contracts of Hunter and Santana. Those are what Target Field can fund.

Originally Posted by drjim

When talking about future payroll why is it a foregone conclusion Morneau won't be on it?

If he is healthy next year there is a decentw chance be signs a midyear extension instead of getting traded. I would welcome that if the price is right.

Any player on the roster could be extended. That would include Pelfrey, Willingham and Blackburn along with Morneau . Those that are on the payroll is dropping to nothing bandwagon will not think it is possible because that is their view. Doumit was extended. Hermann could have taken over that role.

If you were Morneau, would you sign here, knowing that they are likely not to be serious contenders until 2015/6? If the money was the same, would you rather be here or Toronto or Texas or elsewhere? Many of you state they cannot sign players because people do not want to play here, Does that apply to Morneau? Right field is a killer here, after all.

Originally Posted by PseudoSABR

Meh. Draw what reckless conclusions you will. But not spending 90 million in what obviously the team considers a rebuilding year is hardly reason to think that the payroll will be 60 million in 2015/16. It's totally baseless negativity, no matter how many naysayers line up in this thread.

Ryan and the front office have time and time again said they will not over pay for free agents. You think they are really going to start "overpaying" for guys? That's their singular excuse when it comes to lowballing free agents. The Twins only had the +100 million payroll because they got the new stadium and had to take care of their own guys, the Mauers, Morneaus, Cuddyers and Nathans. They didn't get that large payroll by signing expensive free agents. They never value free agents nearly as gererously as they do thier own guys. Payroll won't go up until they have to start giving new contracts to the new crop of guys and that won't be for over a half decade.

Originally Posted by drjim

The team also lost 99 games and I always heard the 2011 payroll was a stretch. Nathan wanted a contender, Kubel wanted out of Target Field and Cuddyer wanted out. Barring a huge overpay they were gone.

When the Twins were good and players wanted to sign they stayed. The exception is the second contracts of Hunter and Santana. Those are what Target Field can fund.

Yeah, but you said they spent the money on other FAs. Some of it, yes, but not event he majority of it. (Oh, and those three were offered contracts much lower than those players knew they could get elsewhere...probably why they didn't want to re-sign...at least a good part)

In any event, the 2011 payroll was because of raises due to players we already had...mostly Mauer. Even though payroll was over 100M, they didn't go sign any high priced FAs to go for it or to put the 2010 over the hump. In fact, they jettisoned their MI and gutted the bullpen

Originally Posted by drjim

The team also lost 99 games and I always heard the 2011 payroll was a stretch. Nathan wanted a contender, Kubel wanted out of Target Field and Cuddyer wanted out. Barring a huge overpay they were gone.

Yeah, but you said the Twins spent the money on other FAs. Some of it, but not even the majority of it. (and the offers to those three were well below what they knew they could get elsewhere.)

In any event, when the Twins were good and players wanted to sign they stayed. The exception is the second contracts of Hunter and Santana. Those are what Target Field can fund.

The 2011 payroll was due to raises to players we already had...mostly Mauer. Even though payroll was over 100M, they didn't go sign any high priced FAs to go for it or to put the 2010 over the hump. In fact, they jettisoned their MI and gutted the bullpen

Originally Posted by old nurse

Any player on the roster could be extended. That would include Pelfrey, Willingham and Blackburn along with Morneau . Those that are on the payroll is dropping to nothing bandwagon will not think it is possible because that is their view. Doumit was extended. Hermann could have taken over that role.

Come on, really?

Only Morneau and Willingham could command any extension of any significance and the farm would have to completely implode for there to be room for both of them. Regardless, the Twins always have overvalued the current players while undervalued available free agents. They can extend existing Twins all they want but we all know the problem is, and always has been, that they need top of the rotation arms. There is no one like that on this club to extend, they need to look externally for those arms. So increasing payroll on extensions likely doesn't get this club over the hump even if they do manage to blow another $14 million on Blackburn.