Thread: Baltimore Sun's Connelly Thinks Saunders Isn't Winding Up In Minnesota

Originally Posted by mcrow

Yes, I think the Twins more than anything, as far as pitching goes, need an ace and continuing to have "5 spots locked" just gives them cause not to splurg on a big time pitcher. Ideally some of the $25M from the TV deal would be used to try to snag a good SP but I'm not even sure who will be on the market at that point.

There is no chance the Twins are going to use any money to sign an "Ace" pitcher anytime in the near future. Not only is Ryan on record as saying he won't overpay for pitching, he is also very adverse to giving long-term deals, something that is a pre-requisite in getting an "ace". Agree or disagree with the strategy but don't expect any extra revenue for payroll to change that strategy.

If you use Saunders numbers for last year and Thyrlos' magic formulas (The tenth inning stretch) you could predict Saunders to be a third starter quality pitcher. 2/15 for a third starter is not bad.

Sign him... I reallly don't care how many arms we have... The quality angle can't be played at this point... The Quantity angle is the only chance for decent pitching and I think it could... could... could work.

Sign more don't put the pen down.

Originally Posted by mcrow

Well, I guess we'll see if the Twins really will be sticking to the 50% of revenue or not next year because if they're looking at having ~$240m in revenue next year with the new TV Deal then they sure as hell better be over $100M in payroll. I have my doubts on that point.

If you've read the tea leaves that the Twins have been scattering about for two years now, they have a (not-so)-secret protocol in place for 2014, it's code-named "the 25% of payroll rule" ie $240M/4 = $60M

Originally Posted by twinsnorth49

There is no chance the Twins are going to use any money to sign an "Ace" pitcher anytime in the near future. Not only is Ryan on record as saying he won't overpay for pitching, he is also very adverse to giving long-term deals, something that is a pre-requisite in getting an "ace". Agree or disagree with the strategy but don't expect any extra revenue for payroll to change that strategy.

If we raid and hire personnel of the caliber of the Rays braintrust, I'm all-in on this strategy, but unfortunately, we don't.

Originally Posted by old nurse

If you use Saunders numbers for last year and Thyrlos' magic formulas (The tenth inning stretch) you could predict Saunders to be a third starter quality pitcher. 2/15 for a third starter is not bad.

Yes, you could predict that oly,.....But then again, Thrylos's formula inexplicably predicted that Cole DeVries is the Twins third hidden major impact starting pitcher behind only Gibson and Meyer. If their numbers are supposedly "similar", why not just pay DeVries the minimum?

Saunders at 2/15 wouldn't be bad, however it does look worse with Correia also getting 2 years. I'd prefer as much payroll free for 2013. Give him a one year deal, its not like he is suddenly going to turn into an ace and command 20 mil a year next year, if you like what he is doing for the club then try to extend him mid season ala Doumit.

Originally Posted by johnnydakota

Isnt Drew Butrea on the 40 man roster?
Isnt he just a waste of space?
Who would claim him?

I counted 22 pitchers on the 40-man, to cover 12 likely openings on the major league staff. That leaves 18 position players to cover the other 13 roster spots. To add a Saunders, I don't see dropping a hitter, even if (like you) I'm willing to joke about the concept of having the name "Butera" mentioned in the same paragraph with "hitter".

Originally Posted by ashburyjohn

I counted 22 pitchers on the 40-man, to cover 12 likely openings on the major league staff. That leaves 18 position players to cover the other 13 roster spots. To add a Saunders, I don't see dropping a hitter, even if (like you) I'm willing to joke about the concept of having the name "Butera" mentioned in the same paragraph with "hitter".

I'm confident that there is a pitcher on the 40-man roster who can be removed to sign Saunders and not weaken the franchise.

Originally Posted by Kwak

I'm confident that there is a pitcher on the 40-man roster who can be removed to sign Saunders and not weaken the franchise.

I'm not so sure. Considering how some of these guys were acquired by the Twins when someone else waived them, the odds would seem high that they would be snapped up by the same process. Can't take the risk - pass on Saunders.

Originally Posted by ashburyjohn

I'm not so sure. Considering how some of these guys were acquired by the Twins when someone else waived them, the odds would seem high that they would be snapped up by the same process. Can't take the risk - pass on Saunders.

I don't whether to laugh or cry.

Originally Posted by Kwak

I'm confident that there is a pitcher on the 40-man roster who can be removed to sign Saunders and not weaken the franchise.

Don't go out on such a limb, Kwak!

Originally Posted by ashburyjohn

I counted 22 pitchers on the 40-man, to cover 12 likely openings on the major league staff. That leaves 18 position players to cover the other 13 roster spots. To add a Saunders, I don't see dropping a hitter, even if (like you) I'm willing to joke about the concept of having the name "Butera" mentioned in the same paragraph with "hitter".

I would guess they may end up needing 13 openings, at least to start the season, what with all the early-season health-issue question marks on the pitching staff. Drew still has an invauable option or two left on his services, doesn't he? He can ride to the rescue the first time Doumit or Mauer go down with a ding.

Originally Posted by jokin

I would guess they may end up needing 13 openings, at least to start the season, what with all the early-season health-issue question marks on the pitching staff. Drew still has an invauable option or two left on his services, doesn't he? He can ride to the rescue the first time Doumit or Mauer go down with a ding.

I may be misunderstanding your point, but optioning a guy does not mean removing him from the 40-man roster, indeed it's the opposite motivation, to put him in the minors for a year without exposing him to the waiver process.

Originally Posted by Kwak

I don't whether to laugh or cry.

You were supposed to laugh, otherwise I did my job wrong.

Originally Posted by twinsnorth49

There is no chance the Twins are going to use any money to sign an "Ace" pitcher anytime in the near future. Not only is Ryan on record as saying he won't overpay for pitching, he is also very adverse to giving long-term deals, something that is a pre-requisite in getting an "ace". Agree or disagree with the strategy but don't expect any extra revenue for payroll to change that strategy.

I never said they would sign an Ace but either way that's what they need. Given the team's history signing aces I don't have high hopes.

What pitcher would you take off the 40 man?

Originally Posted by jokin

If you've read the tea leaves that the Twins have been scattering about for two years now, they have a (not-so)-secret protocol in place for 2014, it's code-named "the 25% of payroll rule" ie $240M/4 = $60M

Yeah, seems to be the route we're heading in but I'm not sure it will go quite that low.

Originally Posted by RIP BYTO

Mediocre starter over 30?.... That's right in the Twins wheelhouse!

Sadly he's basically Carl Pavano if we're lucky at around the same point in their careers.

Originally Posted by mcrow

Sadly he's basically Carl Pavano if we're lucky at around the same point in their careers.

We could only wish for 221 innings of 3.75 ERA for a year.