Twins Daily's Nick Nelson pointed that out that Ryan's statements from earlier in the winter did not quite jive with his actions when it came to fixing the pitching staff. In their weekly podcast, John Bonnes and Aaron Gleeman addressed the same topic and discussed how the team's projected payroll ($78.5 million) is essentially the same as the 2007 opening day payroll of $71 million.
Both pieces make compelling arguments for spending more on resources for 2013. Meanwhile, 1500ESPN.com's Phil Mackey takes the stance that the Twins should not feel pressured to invest in this current season:
[SIZE=3][FONT=arial][COLOR=#000000]Why not spend more money and improve the staff even more for 2013?
Well, Ryan has yet to say so publicly or off-the-record, but it has become obvious that the Twins -- by adding young, talented pitchers, rather than throwing money at veterans -- are attempting to build a crescendo that leads into 2014 and beyond.
[COLOR=#000000]One could make a case for adding another piece, such as unsigned free agents Joe Saunders or Shaun Marcum, or signing one of those guys instead of Correia, who is likely to get hit hard.
[COLOR=#000000]But would Marcum or Saunders -- on multi-year deals, no less -- really make a big difference in 2013 for a team chasing the Detroit Tigers? Probably not. And spending money just to spend money doesn't make any sense either.[/COLOR][/FONT][/SIZE]
[/FONT][/COLOR]Mackey is likely correct in assuming Marcum and Saunders would be better than Correia in terms of moving the win-column needling upwards but not to the point where it would help them necessarily compete. However, let's say the Twins spent that remaining $20 million and added Marcum, Brett Myers and/or Dan Haren/Ryan Dempster to the equation. Now they have a rotation of Dempster/Marcum/Diamond/Worley/Myers in 2013. Would that elevate this team to be able to compete in the AL Central? Or would it be spending money just to spend money?
Which side of this debate to you come down on?