Page 9 of 11 FirstFirst ... 7891011 LastLast
Results 161 to 180 of 213

Thread: Spend money just to spend money?

  1. #161
    Senior Member All-Star TheLeviathan's Avatar
    Posts
    4,100
    Like
    99
    Liked 343 Times in 196 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by The Wise One View Post
    Adding a quality arm would result in tangible competitivess. The debate may be what is the lowest threshold for a quality arm. Marcum, yes. Lohse, not for a draft pick. Blanton? Jurrgens? Slowey? At this point the options get thin.
    No one here is suggesting they get Correia II just so payroll's bottom line looks better. The fact is there are several players enormously better than guys currently on the roster that are available. The best part is they won't be blocking anyone either.

    Adding assets to a team may have a "diminishing return" but there are truly assets available and any team should pursue those if they can. Especially when they are reaching a point of desperation at those positions. (MI and SP)

    I can tell you as a season ticket holder that couldn't use his seats the last two months of the season that apathy is a very real threat for this team. Another season of losing and the diminishing return the Twins should be worried about will have a much different connotation.

  2. #162
    Senior Member Triple-A
    Posts
    378
    Like
    0
    Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Blog Entries
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by Nick Nelson View Post
    We all understand that it's a business. I personally think it's bad business to blatantly lie to your customers and to refuse to invest in giving them a better product. Do you really believe they'll be operating in the red if they spend over $80M? I didn't realize Target Field had dropped back down to Metrodome revenues after three years. The notion is especially ridiculous when you consider the TV money that's about to be dropping on them.
    And here is where the circular argument comes in to play. What if the GM truly believes that the pitchers available are not worth the money? What if he truly feels that there are no logical trades for the team? No ill intent, just not what he considers to be prudent moves. Would you still look at it as lying to the public? What if the intention was to truly keep the payroll at X dollars, but their better business sense wouldn't allow it? Would you feel better if the payroll was higher, but the team was not any better?

    Let's say the payroll does come in at $75 million. How do you if/how that money may be reallocated? It's easy to say the Pohlads are pocketing it (and they may be), but it could be redistributed to other areas with the intention of improving the team: scouting, sabermetrics, capital improvements that are not generally public, the list goes on.

    It is awfully hard to say the Twins are actively deceiving the general public when we are not even to spring training yet, and we do not know what the actual revenue numbers are, or the reasoning behind the decisions.

  3. #163
    Senior Member Triple-A
    Posts
    378
    Like
    0
    Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Blog Entries
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by johnnydakota View Post
    At 140 million the twins would still make a profit....
    What inside information do you have to prove this?

  4. #164
    Senior Member All-Star TheLeviathan's Avatar
    Posts
    4,100
    Like
    99
    Liked 343 Times in 196 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Fire Dan Gladden View Post
    Let's say the payroll does come in at $75 million. How do you if/how that money may be reallocated? It's easy to say the Pohlads are pocketing it (and they may be), but it could be redistributed to other areas with the intention of improving the team: scouting, sabermetrics, capital improvements that are not generally public, the list goes on.
    The way the Twins budget this is really stretching for a defense. By all means, see if you can get an explanation, but there is nothing circular to the argument. The promises were not about what payroll would be, but what would be added to the roster. Those promises flopped and payroll was not the issue.

    For what you claim to be true, Ryan had to be so naive about the price of starting pitching that he was ignorant of how off-base his bravado would look later when the true price came out. I have a hard time believing, as smart as I think Terry Ryan is, that he was that naive about free agency. And if he was, that isn't all that reassuring either.

  5. #165
    Senior Member All-Star
    Posts
    1,650
    Like
    0
    Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Is there much more to this thread than a call for the Twins to have signed someone better than Correia and (to a lesser extent) Pelfrey?

    As of right now the starting rotation has Diamond, Worley and Correia as locks. Pelfrey will also be there if he can answer the bell at the start of the season. It is laughable when people suggest the Twins should sign another starter and push one of these four out of the rotation - it isn't happening. Now, it has been suggested the Twins sign someone like Marcum for the last spot. I could get behind this, but that would pretty much guarantee that Gibson and Hendriks start in the minors. Is this a desirable outcome for a team in the Twins position of rebuilding? Would the Twins be better off filling the spot with someone like Marcum instead of seeing what GIbson or Hendriks have? I'm not sure I agree with that. There is also the slight possibility that Harden and Blackburn make a triumphant returns. There is still depth with the jokers from last year - only they are now the 7-9 starters instead of 2-4 starters.

    For relievers, it would be silly to sign a guy for more than one year. I still wouldn't be surprised if they add one more arm but they do have a workable back of the bullpen and enough arms to sort through in between that this doesn't strike me as a huge need at the moment.

    For everyday players the main holes for opening day are middle infield and potentially center field. With the current prospects there is no way the Twins should sign a CF for multiple years. They might sign a one year stopgap or a 4th OF type but that won't be very much money. For middle infielders there just aren't many guys left that would be much an upgrade over the slop the Twins have to offer. I have heard Kelly Johnson, but there are three issues - 1) he's just not that good, 2) it is debatable if he is much of a defensive 2B, and 3) that is where the Twins are planning on starting Dozier. At this point would it make sense to sign Johnson to block Dozier?

    So by all means spend more money, but there should be a logical plan of who it is spent on and where they fit on the roster both this year and in the future. I don't really see moves that make a ton of sense for the Twins to do. When a team is rebuilding they will fill their roster with younger players that make the minimum and which ultimately lead to a smaller payroll overall.

    I don't want the Twins to do anything that blocks Hendriks, Dozier, Parmelee, and Plouffe initially, and Hicks, Arcia and Gibson by mid-season. I'm not saying they are the answer, but I would suggest this is the season to find out.
    Papers...business papers.

  6. #166
    Senior Member All-Star TheLeviathan's Avatar
    Posts
    4,100
    Like
    99
    Liked 343 Times in 196 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by drjim View Post
    I don't want the Twins to do anything that blocks Hendriks, Dozier, Parmelee, and Plouffe initially, and Hicks, Arcia and Gibson by mid-season. I'm not saying they are the answer, but I would suggest this is the season to find out.
    So, then, by that logic the Twins were lying to say they wanted to upgrade the roster. No matter how you shift the focus, the FO has a ton of accountability.

    Personally, I'm not seeing anyone that Johnson would be "blocking" other than the typical MI garbage. Let them fight over frustrating SS starts. As for Marcum - you don't worry about who he replaces. He's better than anyone currently in the rotation. The guy that loses his spot isn't Hendricks or Gibson - it's Pelfrey.

  7. #167
    Senior Member All-Star Ultima Ratio's Avatar
    Posts
    1,663
    Like
    30
    Liked 32 Times in 17 Posts
    drjim - I will buy you a bottle of scotch, JW Red, if Hendriks and Gibson both don't find themselves in the rotation this year. I think it was Nick who wrote a nice piece about how all our SPs have either serious health issues or will probably regress. I agree. The door will be open from AAA to the MLB club all year. In fact, it will be wide open most of the year I'd guess.
    Man is born free, but everywhere he is in chains.

  8. #168
    Senior Member Big-Leaguer
    Posts
    556
    Like
    0
    Liked 12 Times in 8 Posts
    Not to beat a dead horse (im sorry) but just because Correia is a lock for the rotation at the beginning of the year doesnt mean he won't be bumped for better options. He probably won't because of his contract but you never know.

  9. #169
    Senior Member Triple-A
    Posts
    494
    Like
    3
    Liked 15 Times in 14 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by TheLeviathan View Post
    No one here is suggesting they get Correia II just so payroll's bottom line looks better. The fact is there are several players enormously better than guys currently on the roster that are available. The best part is they won't be blocking anyone either.

    Adding assets to a team may have a "diminishing return" but there are truly assets available and any team should pursue those if they can. Especially when they are reaching a point of desperation at those positions. (MI and SP)

    I can tell you as a season ticket holder that couldn't use his seats the last two months of the season that apathy is a very real threat for this team. Another season of losing and the diminishing return the Twins should be worried about will have a much different connotation.
    I did not even mention a second Correia. Rather, the question asked of Nick is what quality of pitcher would be considered a tangible asset? Psuedobar talked of diminishing return for adding assets. I recall the Twin Cities to be a front running, bandwagon kind of place. Not you when it comes to the Twins, but by attendance figures there are others. Psuedo may unfortunately be right. Without a front running team, there may not be the interest to draw the revenue from the stadium.

  10. #170
    Banned All-Star
    Posts
    1,498
    Like
    419
    Liked 75 Times in 49 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Fire Dan Gladden View Post
    And here is where the circular argument comes in to play. What if the GM truly believes that the pitchers available are not worth the money? What if he truly feels that there are no logical trades for the team? No ill intent, just not what he considers to be prudent moves. Would you still look at it as lying to the public? What if the intention was to truly keep the payroll at X dollars, but their better business sense wouldn't allow it? Would you feel better if the payroll was higher, but the team was not any better?

    Let's say the payroll does come in at $75 million. How do you if/how that money may be reallocated? It's easy to say the Pohlads are pocketing it (and they may be), but it could be redistributed to other areas with the intention of improving the team: scouting, sabermetrics, capital improvements that are not generally public, the list goes on.

    It is awfully hard to say the Twins are actively deceiving the general public when we are not even to spring training yet, and we do not know what the actual revenue numbers are, or the reasoning behind the decisions.
    Step away from the kool-aid

  11. #171
    Banned All-Star
    Posts
    1,498
    Like
    419
    Liked 75 Times in 49 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Fire Dan Gladden View Post
    What inside information do you have to prove this?
    2011 payroll? and a claimed profit of 26.6 million dollars?

  12. #172
    Senior Member All-Star TheLeviathan's Avatar
    Posts
    4,100
    Like
    99
    Liked 343 Times in 196 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by The Wise One View Post
    I did not even mention a second Correia. Rather, the question asked of Nick is what quality of pitcher would be considered a tangible asset? Psuedobar talked of diminishing return for adding assets. I recall the Twin Cities to be a front running, bandwagon kind of place. Not you when it comes to the Twins, but by attendance figures there are others. Psuedo may unfortunately be right. Without a front running team, there may not be the interest to draw the revenue from the stadium.
    First, most conversation here is about Marcum. Or of previously available, more talented options than the ones signed. Secondly, you are misunderstanding Psuedo's point. The diminishing returns is in reference to the fact that at some point more money into players yields a diminishing return on the team's win improvement. The diminishing returns you are speaking of are precisely why this team cutting payroll and fielding an inferior team to the one they could potentially field is a serious threat not just to 2013, but beyond.

    It's much easier to tell a fan base that your third bad season in a row was tough to swallow after you made an honest, concerted effort to improve in the offseason. At least you tried to reverse the direction it was heading. Highlighting an offseason with Correia? That sales pitch is a helluva lot harder.

  13. #173
    Banned All-Star
    Posts
    1,498
    Like
    419
    Liked 75 Times in 49 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by drjim View Post
    Is there much more to this thread than a call for the Twins to have signed someone better than Correia and (to a lesser extent) Pelfrey?

    As of right now the starting rotation has Diamond, Worley and Correia as locks. Pelfrey will also be there if he can answer the bell at the start of the season. It is laughable when people suggest the Twins should sign another starter and push one of these four out of the rotation - it isn't happening. Now, it has been suggested the Twins sign someone like Marcum for the last spot. I could get behind this, but that would pretty much guarantee that Gibson and Hendriks start in the minors. Is this a desirable outcome for a team in the Twins position of rebuilding? Would the Twins be better off filling the spot with someone like Marcum instead of seeing what GIbson or Hendriks have? I'm not sure I agree with that. There is also the slight possibility that Harden and Blackburn make a triumphant returns. There is still depth with the jokers from last year - only they are now the 7-9 starters instead of 2-4 starters.

    For relievers, it would be silly to sign a guy for more than one year. I still wouldn't be surprised if they add one more arm but they do have a workable back of the bullpen and enough arms to sort through in between that this doesn't strike me as a huge need at the moment.

    For everyday players the main holes for opening day are middle infield and potentially center field. With the current prospects there is no way the Twins should sign a CF for multiple years. They might sign a one year stopgap or a 4th OF type but that won't be very much money. For middle infielders there just aren't many guys left that would be much an upgrade over the slop the Twins have to offer. I have heard Kelly Johnson, but there are three issues - 1) he's just not that good, 2) it is debatable if he is much of a defensive 2B, and 3) that is where the Twins are planning on starting Dozier. At this point would it make sense to sign Johnson to block Dozier?

    So by all means spend more money, but there should be a logical plan of who it is spent on and where they fit on the roster both this year and in the future. I don't really see moves that make a ton of sense for the Twins to do. When a team is rebuilding they will fill their roster with younger players that make the minimum and which ultimately lead to a smaller payroll overall.

    I don't want the Twins to do anything that blocks Hendriks, Dozier, Parmelee, and Plouffe initially, and Hicks, Arcia and Gibson by mid-season. I'm not saying they are the answer, but I would suggest this is the season to find out.
    At this point in the off season, when players that would of helped the Twins and could of been used as trade chips are off the market, i agree.
    If at the start of the off season if we had signed Marcier Izturis, he would have been the bar with which the kids needed to jump over or been plan B in case they (the kids Florimon and Dozier) struggled.As for pitching Dempster, Sanchez and Jackson would have been nice to have to mentor the younger pitcher ,and would have brought a nice package come july....Or next winter

  14. #174
    The King In The North All-Star Nick Nelson's Avatar
    Posts
    1,625
    Like
    6
    Liked 65 Times in 24 Posts
    Blog Entries
    294
    Quote Originally Posted by Ultima Ratio View Post
    drjim - I will buy you a bottle of scotch, JW Red, if Hendriks and Gibson both don't find themselves in the rotation this year. I think it was Nick who wrote a nice piece about how all our SPs have either serious health issues or will probably regress. I agree. The door will be open from AAA to the MLB club all year. In fact, it will be wide open most of the year I'd guess.
    Well said. Among the players the Twins are counting on to fill spots in their rotation, there are two guys coming off elbow scopes, one guy 9 months removed from TJ and one who got booted from an NL rotation on merit last year. Having Gibson and Hendriks prove they belong in Triple-A would be a good problem to have. Because if they're in the majors and show they don't belong, there ain't much to fall back on.

    I've heard a lot of "Outside of Correia they've had a fine offseason" sentiment. That may be true. But the Correia signing is the crux of this whole thing. That was their marquee multi-year signing (no pun intended) and they went with one of the worst available guys on the market, a pitcher who is not noticeably better than much of what they already had.

  15. #175
    Senior Member All-Star PseudoSABR's Avatar
    Posts
    1,771
    Like
    143
    Liked 117 Times in 70 Posts
    How ****ing hard is it to spell Pseudo?

  16. #176
    Speediest Moderator All-Star snepp's Avatar
    Posts
    3,650
    Like
    926
    Liked 640 Times in 250 Posts
    Psuedo-hard?
    "Maybe you could go grab a bat and ball… and learn something. Maybe you will get it."
    - Strib commenter educating the elitists on the value of RBI's

  17. #177
    Senior Member All-Star Shane Wahl's Avatar
    Posts
    3,792
    Like
    4
    Liked 69 Times in 52 Posts
    Blog Entries
    63
    Quote Originally Posted by Nick Nelson View Post
    Who's to say it doesn't? Are you so firmly convinced that with a quality arm added to the top of the rotation, this team would stand absolutely no chance of competing and at least keeping things interesting into September? I'm not. In fact, I'm not totally convinced the current roster can't keep things interesting, but I'm quite confident that if they do they'll be wishing they'd added more of a legitimate asset to the rotation during the offseason. I don't see what purpose is served by opting for table scraps and giving your starting corps none of the immediate help it so desperately needed (save Worley) despite ample funds.

    With the pieces they have on offense and in the bullpen, the Twins have too much talent on their roster to just wave the white flag before the season starts, in my opinion. Maybe that's where I differ from a lot of you.
    Yeah this is pretty true. A Diamond-Marcum-Worley top three is actually bordering on legitimate as a top three. This is not true when 5th-6th starter Correia has to enter that picture. Also, keep in mind that Chicago is going nowhere, KC and Cleveland are up in the air with no true clear way to 85 wins, and the Tigers are a key injury away from being a problem.

    And IN ANY EVENT. Signing someone legitimate even if the team ends up not being good could mean to a TRADE to a contender at the deadline and the Twins might get something of value for the future. It's an investment and the Twins are willing to do it, apparently.

  18. #178
    Senior Member All-Star Shane Wahl's Avatar
    Posts
    3,792
    Like
    4
    Liked 69 Times in 52 Posts
    Blog Entries
    63
    This thread is making me go crazy. Good god. Even if the Twins are bad again in 2013, signing someone who will be a potential trade asset at the deadline would be a smart move. And I am not convinced that the Twins are going to be very bad. A full year of a healthy Plouffe and a healthy Morneau, coupled with the potential rise of Hicks and Arcia? This doesn't sound so bad offensively as an improvement (and the offense was NOT the problem last year). What the Twins have done so far was add one legitimate pitcher (though as Nick as made clear to me, Worley is not innings-tested at all) and a replacement level pitcher when the Twins already have a half dozen of them in the system. They added correctly for 2015 and that is fine, but they cannot just bank on the future--they must at least try in the present. And it is/was not totally out of their reach to do so.

    That is the goddamned point. Now I can't but leave this ridiculous thread.

  19. #179
    Senior Member Triple-A
    Posts
    378
    Like
    0
    Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Blog Entries
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by johnnydakota View Post
    2011 payroll? and a claimed profit of 26.6 million dollars?
    Based off of USA Today, the Twins payroll last year was somewhere around $74 million. Add in your claimed profit of $26.6 million (where did that come from by the way?), that would allow them to go up to about $100 million (assuming that the Pohlads would be willing to accept a break even year, which I doubt).

    Even adding in the $20 million in additional TV revenue, tell me again how they would still make a profit with a $140 million dollar payroll?

  20. #180
    Senior Member Triple-A
    Posts
    378
    Like
    0
    Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Blog Entries
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by TheLeviathan View Post
    The way the Twins budget this is really stretching for a defense. By all means, see if you can get an explanation, but there is nothing circular to the argument. The promises were not about what payroll would be, but what would be added to the roster. Those promises flopped and payroll was not the issue.

    For what you claim to be true, Ryan had to be so naive about the price of starting pitching that he was ignorant of how off-base his bravado would look later when the true price came out. I have a hard time believing, as smart as I think Terry Ryan is, that he was that naive about free agency. And if he was, that isn't all that reassuring either.
    Why would it be stretching it? Is it so hard to believe that the intention may have been to do as was said initially, but as the winter went on things did not go according to plan? Every beat reporter, every national pundit talked about how the Twins were in play with virtually every starting pitcher on the market. And yes, prices were considerably higher than expected for starting pitching, even the mediocre ones.

    The Twins promised to add starting pitching which would improve the staff. By my calculations they did that (are you telling me that Worley, Corriea, and potentially Harden are not upgrades over what we had at the end of last year). It may not be perfect: they dramatically overpaid for Corriea and Harden is a risk, but they did improve.

    I also hoped that they would be able to sign better quality starting pitching. I too believe that a couple of small breaks in their favor and this team could be in the hunt for a playoff spot. To say TR intentionally misled the Twins fans about upgrading the pitching, especially without hard facts to support it, is defamation and not very responsible.

    As for the TR kool-aid, if you are saying that I believe TR is the right person for the Twins organization due to his strengths in scouting and payroll control, then keep filling my glass. There are very few people that could come into this organization and do the job the way the Pohlads want.

Page 9 of 11 FirstFirst ... 7891011 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
©2014 TwinsCentric, LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Interested in advertising with Twins Daily? Click here.