Jump to content

Providing independent coverage of the Minnesota Twins.
Subscribe to Twins Daily Email
Photo

5th Starter

  • Please log in to reply
51 replies to this topic

#41 yarnivek1972

yarnivek1972

    Minnesota Twins

  • Members
  • 3,039 posts

Posted 20 April 2018 - 08:01 PM

That extension doesn’t look good now but I don’t recall thinking it was a bad idea then. Part of the risk for a mid market team is that it isn’t reasonable to throw away these sunk costs.

They committed 13 years to Hughes, Santana and Nolasco and have a good return on 3 of those 10 years thus far. That is not a recipe for success.


They gave him a 5 year extension one year into a 3 year contract. What was the rush? He wasn’t going anywhere. Decisions like that are exactly why Terry Ryan was fired.
  • jokin, Major Leauge Ready and Platoon like this

#42 jorgenswest

jorgenswest

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 3,504 posts

Posted 20 April 2018 - 08:09 PM

They gave him a 5 year extension one year into a 3 year contract. What was the rush? He wasn’t going anywhere. Decisions like that are exactly why Terry Ryan was fired.


Turns out it was a horribly bad decision. I wonder if it was viewed that way at the time.

#43 yarnivek1972

yarnivek1972

    Minnesota Twins

  • Members
  • 3,039 posts

Posted 20 April 2018 - 08:43 PM

Turns out it was a horribly bad decision. I wonder if it was viewed that way at the time.


It was by most of the people on the message boards I was on at the time. For that reason. Because it was unnecessary.
  • Platoon likes this

#44 spycake

spycake

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 12,760 posts

Posted 20 April 2018 - 08:47 PM

It was by most of the people on the message boards I was on at the time. For that reason. Because it was unnecessary.


Actually here it was pretty well-received. Of course, we were all drunk on Hughes's record K/BB ratio. And alcohol.

John Bonnes was a prominent voice of dissent on the deal.
  • USAFChief and Riverbrian like this

#45 Puckett34

Puckett34

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,115 posts
  • LocationSioux Falls, SD

Posted 20 April 2018 - 09:02 PM

 

I am happy they chose Hughes. 2-3 poor starts and we can release him & eat the rest of the contract.

He's probably lucky they chose to have him start on Sunday. If they would've had him start on Monday-Tuesday he'd probably get only one start.Getting thrown to the wolves versus the Yankees and all.

Hit dingers.  Never bunt.


#46 Sconnie

Sconnie

    From the "right" side of the St Croix

  • Members
  • 3,475 posts
  • LocationNW Wisconsin

Posted 22 April 2018 - 05:12 AM

Honestly, if we're gonna start him I'd rather it be against the Rays. I'd prefer the Royals but take what you can get I suppose.

after the first two games, do you stand by this?

#47 Sconnie

Sconnie

    From the "right" side of the St Croix

  • Members
  • 3,475 posts
  • LocationNW Wisconsin

Posted 22 April 2018 - 05:18 AM

Actually here it was pretty well-received. Of course, we were all drunk on Hughes's record K/BB ratio. And alcohol.

John Bonnes was a prominent voice of dissent on the deal.

seems to me, there were a number of posters who agreed w/ Bonnes. Maybe 50/50 or 60% approval. There were a loud group at the time wondering why you’d extend a (any) pitcher after one year
  • Platoon likes this

#48 jokin

jokin

    Twins News Team

  • Twins News Team
  • 11,241 posts

Posted 22 April 2018 - 05:50 AM

They gave him a 5 year extension one year into a 3 year contract. What was the rush? He wasn’t going anywhere. Decisions like that are exactly why Terry Ryan was fired.


Yes

 

Joyous, fact-based and tireless Twins fan for 40+ years, who unfortunately has been characterized as-

 

"forcing Twins fans to endure more bitter, baseless, and tiresome cheap shots about the Twins FO."


#49 spycake

spycake

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 12,760 posts

Posted 22 April 2018 - 07:34 AM

I think my characterization is accurate:

http://twinsdaily.co...nd-phil-hughes/

I didn't say it was universally loved here, but certainly most approved, and most objections seemed pretty mild.

I fully admit I was quite wrong, and quite drunk on the record K/BB ratio. Bonnes was right, the remaining 2/16 was such an incredible value, it really didn't make sense to tear that up for a longer, more expensive deal. I guess we were writing off Nolasco at the time and looking for a replacement, but really it wasn't prudent.

#50 TFRazor

TFRazor

    Cedar Rapids

  • Members
  • 181 posts

Posted 23 April 2018 - 11:52 AM

 

after the first two games, do you stand by this?

Sure. He wouldn't have been able to keep the offense from crapping the bed, or the bullpen from letting 2 of 3 get away. Would you rather start him against NY? If they're going to make the decision to start him then letting him pitch against Tampa is a much better bet than letting him go against the Yankees.

Edited by TFRazor, 23 April 2018 - 11:55 AM.

  • Sconnie likes this

#51 yarnivek1972

yarnivek1972

    Minnesota Twins

  • Members
  • 3,039 posts

Posted 23 April 2018 - 03:44 PM

I don’t think it is a coincidence that Fernando Romero started yesterday for AAA. If after 2 or MAYBE 3 more Hughes starts the results are as we expect, a swap out becomes pretty easy.
  • jorgenswest, Sconnie and Vanimal46 like this

#52 Sconnie

Sconnie

    From the "right" side of the St Croix

  • Members
  • 3,475 posts
  • LocationNW Wisconsin

Posted 23 April 2018 - 08:46 PM

Sure. He wouldn't have been able to keep the offense from crapping the bed, or the bullpen from letting 2 of 3 get away. Would you rather start him against NY? If they're going to make the decision to start him then letting him pitch against Tampa is a much better bet than letting him go against the Yankees.

point exactly. It doesn’t matter who he starts against, but if you’re choosing to punt on a start, should it be against a team you have a chance to win against otherwise?
  • Mike Sixel likes this