Thread: Mackey: Low Risk or Not, Twins are Taking a Philosophical Gamble

Originally Posted by TheLeviathan

Not sure anyone is suggesting that. But I'd love Marcum for at least the chance that he'd have a great season and be traded at the deadline for more future ammo. It beats the inevitable "Getting Willingham back from an injury is just like making a trade!" that we'll be doing on Aug. 1.

In all seriousness, even if you can't improve to a playoff level, putting that 30M into talent gives the team many, many more options both in the immediate future and the near future. And given what will be done with the money otherwise, I don't think that's much to ask.

I'm not sure signing a guy with the sole idea of "Well if he does well we will trade him!" is a really sound baseball idea (maybe I am wrong) but at the end of the day, most deadline deals over the past few years haven't been including any real stud packages of prospects, and Marcum even at his best won't command such a return IMO

Don't get me wrong, I still think they should sign Marcum, as I have been stating for months, but if you are doing it in hopes of dealing him at the deadline, I think you are at that point better off using that money to pump into scouting, international signings etc. If you want to sign him in order to stablize the rotation and "go for it" then I am 110% in.

I look at the contracts signed this off-season and I don't see a ton where I am like "damn the Twins really missed out on that!" Also, I think the Span and Revere trades netted them some of the best talent in the trade market this off-season (besides the Bauer trade- I really, really, wish they would have gone after a Bauer or Johnson)

Originally Posted by SpiritofVodkaDave

If you don't have a team that you can build that can conceivably win 90-92 games, then what is the point of spending a bunch of improving them to be a 78-84 win team best case scenario? If Hicks/Gibson/etc come out and look good, then you take a run at things! You don't just waste money on 2-3 year contracts at this point for the sake of trying to compete if everything goes right. I agree that they should have signed some more one year contracts, and I still think they should go after guys like Marcum/Saunders/Kelly Johnson on such deals.

If anything, I give Ryan credit for realizing this is most likely a rebuilding year, instead of going out and trying to just make a bunch of bad signings (Correia excluded- but even his contract isn't that bad relatively)

Best case scenario is guys like Hendriks/Worley/Diamond/Gibson/Pelfrey/Parmelee/Hicks/Morneau/Plouffe/Dozier etc all preform well out of the gate, THEN you can go out and try to add some more pieces if necessary.

How about to give the fans reason for optimism...to put a product somewhat worthy of the fans...to at least TRY and fulfill your promises...and it's not like those players signed aren't assets as well..

Why does it have to be between title contender and dregs of the AL?

Originally Posted by SpiritofVodkaDave

Best case scenario is guys like Hendriks/Worley/Diamond/Gibson/Pelfrey/Parmelee/Hicks/Morneau/Plouffe/Dozier etc all preform well out of the gate, THEN you can go out and try to add some more pieces if necessary.

But they won't, haven't you been listening?

Originally Posted by SpiritofVodkaDave

I'm not sure signing a guy with the sole idea of "Well if he does well we will trade him!" is a really sound baseball idea (maybe I am wrong) but at the end of the day, most deadline deals over the past few years haven't been including any real stud packages of prospects, and Marcum even at his best won't command such a return IMO

Like I said, at the very least it gives us that. Potentially adding him gives us more upside than that. I would've taken Baker over Pelfrey. How about Haren on a one year shot? Brandon McCarthy over Correia? How about a year or two for Drew? Dave, there were plenty of ways to eat up some of that cash that will now be pocketed that would add talent to this team without crippling the future.

Originally Posted by SpiritofVodkaDave

Knowing what contracts and trades have happened thus far in MLB, I would really like to hear one of the "Derp the Twins have screwed the pooch this off-season again!" folks lay out a plan on how they would turn this team from a 95 loss team to a 92 win team this off-season (without giving up the future)

I'm all ears. (Keep in mind that it's highly unlikely that a guy like Dan Haren would have signed here over Washigton for the same contract (for very obvious reasons) so if you are going to include a guy like him in the plan, make sure you take on some extra dollars)

At the end of the day, the only way the Twins compete is if they get some HUGE contributions from young players like Hicks, Gibson, Dozier and Plouffe. And if Mauer/Morneau/Willingham can all stay healthy and mash. Replacing a guy like Correia with Myers isn't going to be the difference between a 90 loss year and a 90 win year FYI.

FWIW: I'd still like to see the Twins bring in Marcum. At least then you have a pitching staff that if a few things break right could end up around league average.

Absolutely. It's the obvious move, the right move, the affordable move (even with an overbid to get him), which is why they won't do it.

I don't think anyone is under any illusions that the Twins can make a worst-to-first run like in 1990. An aggressive attempt to get Shields in trade w/ an extension, plus a 2nd tier signee like Marcum should have been doable and would have produced an-above average rotation and still left room to get some MI help with a $100M payroll. This would have meant no Meyer, but still would have left the door open for acquiring Worley and May. This would have been more than enough elixir to provide the true "hope" and "positivity" that the homers are falsely claiming has been achieved this offseason

Originally Posted by ThePuck

How about to give the fans reason for optimism...to put a product somewhat worthy of the fans...to at least TRY and fulfill your promises...and it's not like those players signed aren't assets as well..

Why does it have to be between title contender and dregs of the AL?

Agreed. With the money available they certainly could have fielded a team that was capable of staying within 10 games through August. And with luck and injuries in the division, who knows. As is, this team will almost necessarily suck again this year, and that is not what was promised.

Originally Posted by TheLeviathan

Like I said, at the very least it gives us that. Potentially adding him gives us more upside than that. I would've taken Baker over Pelfrey. How about Haren on a one year shot? Brandon McCarthy over Correia? How about a year or two for Drew? Dave, there were plenty of ways to eat up some of that cash that will now be pocketed that would add talent to this team without crippling the future.

I don't understand how adding players that would add 20-25M to payroll for the next three years would cripple this team with the amount of payroll coming off in the next two years...

Originally Posted by ThePuck

I don't understand how adding players that would add 20-25M to payroll for the next three years would cripple this team with the amount of payroll coming off in the next two years...

Nor do I.

Originally Posted by TheLeviathan

Nor do I.

Yet people keep using it in their argument...

Originally Posted by SpiritofVodkaDave

Knowing what contracts and trades have happened thus far in MLB, I would really like to hear one of the "Derp the Twins have screwed the pooch this off-season again!" folks lay out a plan on how they would turn this team from a 95 loss team to a 92 win team this off-season (without giving up the future)

I'm all ears. (Keep in mind that it's highly unlikely that a guy like Dan Haren would have signed here over Washigton for the same contract (for very obvious reasons) so if you are going to include a guy like him in the plan, make sure you take on some extra dollars)

At the end of the day, the only way the Twins compete is if they get some HUGE contributions from young players like Hicks, Gibson, Dozier and Plouffe. And if Mauer/Morneau/Willingham can all stay healthy and mash. Replacing a guy like Correia with Myers isn't going to be the difference between a 90 loss year and a 90 win year FYI.

FWIW: I'd still like to see the Twins bring in Marcum. At least then you have a pitching staff that if a few things break right could end up around league average.

I would have been real interested in knowing how much it would take to overpay a mid level talent free agent to go to a last place team two years running. Willingham and the others came to a team that had won the division two years before. There was no reason to think a pitching staff could implode twice..

Originally Posted by SpiritofVodkaDave

Best case scenario is guys like Hendriks/Worley/Diamond/Gibson/Pelfrey/Parmelee/Hicks/Morneau/Plouffe/Dozier etc all preform well out of the gate, THEN you can go out and try to add some more pieces if necessary.

Originally Posted by twinsnorth49

But they won't, haven't you been listening?

Gibson, Pelfrey and Hicks quite possibly won't even be on the 25-man out of the gate. Worley probably will, but is coming off of September elbow surgery, so his initial level of effectiveness is in some doubt. Would a breakout opening to the season with the rest of this list cause the Twins to go out and acquire more pieces and jeopardize the "plan" for the future? Unlikely. I dion't think anyone's saying "they won't" have a chance to play above expectations, but the FO hasn't exactly done the things needed to have another option beside the "best-case scenario" to be even incrementally better than last year.

Originally Posted by ThePuck

Yet people keep using it in their argument...

I've read every post in this thread, I didn't read a single one that made this arguement.

Originally Posted by ThePuck

Yet people keep using it in their argument...

.....And at first, kept attacking those who stayed steadfast in their prediction that they were going into slo-mo payroll immolation, promises notwithstanding.

Originally Posted by old nurse

I would have been real interested in knowing how much it would take to overpay a mid level talent free agent to go to a last place team two years running. Willingham and the others came to a team that had won the division two years before. There was no reason to think a pitching staff could implode twice..

So not adding talent and being content with that.....somehow changes that trend? Please explain.

Originally Posted by twinsnorth49

I've read every post in this thread, I didn't read a single one that made this arguement.

This argument has been all over this site...not just this thread.

Hopefully in 6 years 3 top-5 draft picks makes all of our angst somewhat worthwhile...
Trying to grasp at some positive straws after rereading the Mackey article.

Originally Posted by Mark_RM

Hopefully in 6 years 3 top-5 draft picks makes all of our angst somewhat worthwhile...
Trying to grasp at some positive straws after rereading the Mackey article.

That's a long, long grasp for positivity straws ....2019? The days of 5000 angst-ridden remaining fans in the stands would be upon us way before then...

Does anyone think that having Swarzak on this team will make a difference. The change will come when the lightweights are gone(read 2014). Gardinhire already knows that if the young players do not start with the big team if they have decent spring trainings, that this season is lost

Originally Posted by jokin

An aggressive attempt to get Shields in trade w/ an extension, n and still left room to get some MI help with a $100M payroll. This would have meant no Meyer, but still would have left the door open for acquiring Worley and May. This would have been more than enough elixir to provide the true "hope" and "positivity" that the homers are falsely claiming has been achieved this offseason

Denard Span for Shields? Compared to what KC gave up. Get a reality check.
What middle infielder who could hit had any sort of range left that was available on the free agent market this year? Go ahead and be snide and tell me who I missed.

Originally Posted by ThePuck

Yet people keep using it in their argument...

That argument was used lst year and the year before. Your statement does explain a lot