Thread: Saunders

Bummer, but not end of world situation. Time to look into trading for Capuano.

Sinker's story on this signing:

Reports: Lefty Saunders picks Mariners instead of Twins | StarTribune.com

Several times in recent weeks, Twins officials have said that the roster as currently constructed, even with changes already made this winter, could change more before the start of the regular season. With Saunders no longer an option, we'll see what else the team will pursue -- or whether they will.

To me, this is the icing on the cake. And not a good cake. A crap cake. With putrid frosting.

Originally Posted by old nurse

Since everywhere else reports that Hernandez to a 175 million dollar contract I would really doubt your source, given your reporting of the Hernandez contract.

Nothing wrong the source, or his reporting of the contract, just your comprehension.

Originally Posted by old nurse

Since everywhere else reports that Hernandez to a 175 million dollar contract I would really doubt your source, given your reporting of the Hernandez contract.

Here is the source for the Felix deal:

Felix Hernandez, Seattle Mariners agree to $135.5 million contract extension, according to sources - ESPN

They're a going concern on the east coast, and while hardly infallible, they're right at least often enough to keep paying the ConEd bill.

Here's the link to the blogger in his footie pajamas you appear to imagine I'm citing regarding Saunders:

Lefty Joe Saunders to sign a one-year deal with Mariners USA Today.

It's obviously not completely solid without the story on the option, but it is a team source the reporter cites.

Posting this more for the other folks on the thread, since you seem generally undaunted by pieces that don't fit your puzzle.

Originally Posted by John Bonnes

To me, this is the icing on the cake. And not a good cake. A crap cake. With putrid frosting.

Depending on how much you want Saunders next year, there's maybe a silver lining here for you if Saunders' (team) option year doesn't pan out:

"According to many reports, Saunders had been seeking a three-year deal, but pitching at Safeco may be the next best thing. The Baltimore Sun's Eduardo A. Encina wrote that pitching at Safeco "sets him up well for a good season before heading back into free agency."

If Saunders plans to go to a franchise next year that doesn't understand park effect, then I think the Twins stand an excellent chance to be near the top of a very short list.

Why would they sign him next year, if they refused this year? Face it. They lied to us all when they said they would aggressively pursue pitching, or Ryan failed at his job. Either way, bad news.

The other thing is, the Ms moved in their fences all around Safeco's left side, including a big slice of left center.

http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=...QEwAQ&dur=1242

Originally Posted by mike wants wins

Why would they sign him next year, if they refused this year? Face it. They lied to us all when they said they would aggressively pursue pitching, or Ryan failed at his job. Either way, bad news.

My point was that it's silly to say, as the Baltimore reporter did, that Saunders is going to pitch in what everyone knows to be an extreme pitchers' park, hope it boosts his numbers, and then get a nice contract because everyone suddenly forgot that Safeco is an extreme pitchers' park.

But if anyone could fall for it, I'd like the chances of a franchise that chose "makeup" over a decade of evidence of mediocrity in evaluating Correia, or one that employs a personnel guy who doesn't like Edwin Jackson now because of what he saw as a scout when Jackson was in high school 12 years ago.

I didn't want Saunders. I wanted a front office that would make offseason moves that, not for even a moment, would give cause for anyone to feel just the slightest disappointment that we didn't get Joe Saunders. And I haven't even hoped for the Twins to be 2013 contenders since before the 2012 season ended.

Originally Posted by mike wants wins

Why would they sign him next year, if they refused this year? Face it. They lied to us all when they said they would aggressively pursue pitching, or Ryan failed at his job. Either way, bad news.

They lied to you, mike. And tomorrow they're going to come over and kill your dog.

Originally Posted by Willihammer

Gernzy what was the $$ we offered?

dollars and years

there are two parts to that

What do folks expect if he won't come here for a good value deal? Please look at the chart in the article at Puckett's Pond called, "The Minnesota Twins and Their Ongoing Starting Pitching Saga." If the Twins signed Saunders to a multi-year deal we are looking at a potential log jam that gets in the way of younger pitchers getting the shot they need to grow. Everybody agrees that Correa was poor move so let’s not make another one. I wish they had signed better SP in this offseason but that does not mean panic and make bad deals. If they offered Saunders somewhere in the area of 7-9 million for one year and he turned it down then I am content with that. Let him go and go ahead with what we have. It is going to be a challenging year; I don’t think Saunders would have made that big of a difference.

Originally Posted by Willihammer

The other thing is, the Ms moved in their fences all around Safeco's left side, including a big slice of left center.

Google Image Result for http://l2.yimg.com/bt/api/res/1.2/2BokA5J._T.YbifBUWrH7A--/YXBwaWQ9eW5ld3M7cT04NQ--/http://media.zenfs.com/en/blogs/sptusmlbexperts/Safeco2.jpg

Thanks for posting. Should make for an interesting year for a lefty who allowed a .307/.349/.500 slash by righties in 2012. Good luck with that chase for the big dough in 2014, Joe.

OK wrong thread wrong topic, and im sure this has been covered,but i missed it.
Why do the Mets think they shouldnt have to give up a 1st rounder if they sign Bourn?

I guess we won't know how much the contract is for until the deal is signed and final after the physical.

I will reserve judgement until then.

Originally Posted by birdwatcher

They lied to you, mike. And tomorrow they're going to come over and kill your dog.

I believe that , they came down here and poisioned my parakeet =(

Originally Posted by johnnydakota

OK wrong thread wrong topic, and im sure this has been covered,but i missed it.
Why do the Mets think they shouldnt have to give up a 1st rounder if they sign Bourn?

Because the Pirates drafted Appel at 7 last spring and he declined. So they are promised another top 10 pick in 2013. That pushes everyone below them down a spot. The mets had 10 going into 2013 but now they've been pushed out into unprotected territory. Only top 10 picks are protected.

Originally Posted by Willihammer

Because the Pirates drafted Appel at 7 last spring and he declined. So they are promised another top 10 pick in 2013. That pushes everyone below them down a spot. The mets had 10 going into 2013 but now they've been pushed out into unprotected territory. Only top 10 picks are protected.

thanks for the explination =)

Originally Posted by johnnydakota

OK wrong thread wrong topic, and im sure this has been covered,but i missed it.
Why do the Mets think they shouldnt have to give up a 1st rounder if they sign Bourn?

The Mets are arguing they "earned" a protected pick by having a bottom 10 record. The Pirates' 9th pick was compensation for not signing Appel.

Originally Posted by Esoteric Ball Guy

The Mets are arguing they "earned" a protected pick by having a bottom 10 record. The Pirates' 9th pick was compensation for not signing Appel.

thank you i forgot Appel non signing ,gave them a pick after the same slot last year , thanks

I said either lied, or failed. One of those is true, right? Is there a third option? I guess, if you think these signings do make them competitive, that is the third option, but I have no idea how anyone could think that, hope it maybe, but not think it.