An awesome tweet from Dave St. Peter

[Oxtung]

The issue with Marcum was health. He only pitched 126 innings last year. Lots of scouts were unsure if he was going to come back from it. That's why he was one of the last free agents to sign. The Twins weren't the only team to be concerned about it.

 

You might think it odd that the Twins signed Pelfrey in light of this. But they had seen him throw off a mound several times before making the decision, while Marcum was unable to.

 

Here is the piece of the post I was originally quoting:

 

I find it amusing how much people are up in arms over the difference between Correa and Pelfrey Vs Marcum and Saunders.

 

They're all near replacement level players.

 

 

That has nothing to do with health and everything to do with the quality of the pitcher. These kinds of statements get thrown around, or got thrown around during the offseason, with disturbing frequency. The idea is demonstrably false, since replacement level has a corresponding statistic that tracks players, yet these comments keep coming up to justify the offseason decisions made by the FO.

 

On a different note, do you have any evidence to back up your assertion about Pelfrey and Marcum throwing off a mound? That seems pretty suspect. Marcum pitched the final 10ish games to end the season while Pelfrey was in the middle of the offseason following TJ surgery.

[cmathewson]

On a different note, do you have any evidence to back up your assertion about Pelfrey and Marcum throwing off a mound? That seems pretty suspect. Marcum pitched the final 10ish games to end the season while Pelfrey was in the middle of the offseason following TJ surgery.

 

There were stories in the local dailies about how the Twins took the chance on Pelfrey, having followed his rehab since the end of last year, including live "tryout" sessions. As to Marcum, several pundits wondered aloud why he went unsigned until the very last second, and then signed for what seemed like a pittance. Rosenthal was one of them. The answer: teams were worried about his health.

 

I could go and dig those links up for you. But I'm lazy.

[Boom Boom]

It also is interesting to note that the Smith years were marked with being over budget consistently. This team is markedly better than the 2011 team, which cost $35 million more. More proof that merely spending money is not a recipe for success in this game.

 

I don't think the Twins ever disclosed what their budget was, or whether or not they were over budget during Smith's tenure.

[bird]

World? Color? Sky?

 

Good questions for you to ask. World? In YOUR world, you can look at a handful of statistics like, say, Marcum and McCarthy versus Pelfry and Correia, and suddenly you KNOW everything we all need to know. You then villify Ryan, who couldn't possibly know more than you about evaluating talent, or have more information than you, or even be close to as smart as you. That's YOUR world.

 

Sky? In the REAL world, the rest of us would look at the same statistics and GUESS that it might make more sense to sign the guys Ryan didn't sign. Unlike you, we just wouldn't KNOW for sure. Seems the sky's the limit for you though, what with all those statistics to help you predict the future, jokin.

 

Let's see. Color? Marcum is shut down. McCarthy is at least as much of an injury risk as Pelfry, isn't he? So, while it APPEARS that signing Marcum and McCarthy instead of Pelfry and Correia would be better, we just don't know. Perhaps there's some color beyond a list of free agents that we didn't sign that even you aren't privy to.

 

Reciting a bunch of statistics doesn't make you right and someone else wrong.

[Brock Beauchamp]

Really, all of this disgust boils down to Correia, our new favorite whipping boy. The Pelfrey signing was a decent one if you couple it with someone who has proven themselves as an above-average (or even average) starter.

 

Saunders and Pelfrey would be an unimpressive top of the rotation but if you add in Worley, Diamond, Harden, Hendriks, etc... You start to put together a serviceable rotation.

 

The weak link in all of this is Correia. Without that signing, we wouldn't care about Pelfrey and might even be a bit bullish on the signing.

[bird]

Bill Smith spends big, then he is replaced by Ryan due to philosophic differences and then payroll drops....coincidence?

 

100% coincidence. I know it's hard not to believe there isn't a master plan in place to cut spending, because spending has gone down two years in a row now. As unpopular as it is on his site, I still believe that, when the circumstance warrant the spending to increase, it will. Two different points of view, both arrived at honestly.

 

OK, let's have it, Chief. Accuse me of spinning the facts and sereptitiously working for the Twins.

[Mike Sixel]

What warrants increased spending, just curious?

[CDog]

The weak link in all of this is Correia. Without that signing, we wouldn't care about Pelfrey and might even be a bit bullish on the signing.

 

I don't comment a lot on signings or non-signings, but I'll go on record that I liked the Pelfrey signing at the time, now, and therefore will continue to like it regardless of what happens in the future (because that shouldn't cloud the decision in the moment it was made).

[Oxtung]

As to Marcum, several pundits wondered aloud why he went unsigned until the very last second, and then signed for what seemed like a pittance. Rosenthal was one of them. The answer: teams were worried about his health.

 

This is my problem. Your analysis on Marcum was based on reporters speculating but then you interpret that speculation as fact. I saw plenty of speculation but have never seen anything concrete. That is why I asked if you had a source.

[cmathewson]

I don't think the Twins ever disclosed what their budget was, or whether or not they were over budget during Smith's tenure.

 

When they signed Jimmers and Hudson, Jim Pohlad said he was willing to go over budget for guys like that. After signing those two guys, the payroll was around $110M. The implication is that the budget for 2010 was about $100M. The next year, Smith went up again, by $5 million. Maybe that was based on unexpectedly improved revenues in 2010. Still, I doubt the revenues allowed for an increase of $15M in budget.

[Brock Beauchamp]

I don't comment a lot on signings or non-signings, but I'll go on record that I liked the Pelfrey signing at the time, now, and therefore will continue to like it regardless of what happens in the future (because that shouldn't cloud the decision in the moment it was made).

 

I'm also generally positive about the Pelfrey signing. Not my first choice but also not a bad one.

[Riverbrian]

It's loud speculation though... If you want to know what GM's think of someone... Once they hit FA... How much they pay him is a fairly accurate indicator of value.

 

Marcum has decent numbers but what other teams are willing to pay him isnt as decent a number... At that point I don't need to read much speculation to know that not everything is right with Marcum.

[cmathewson]

This is my problem. Your analysis on Marcum was based on reporters speculating but then you interpret that speculation as fact. I saw plenty of speculation but have never seen anything concrete. That is why I asked if you had a source.

 

Fair enough. But teams don't disclose this for liability reasons. So there ain't no source. But that's the nature of these discussions. We're not dealing with concrete facts on either side of the argument. But I will take Rosenthal's report over nothing.

[diehardtwinsfan]

I didnt' see the context of Fanatic Jack's original post, but just reading the twitter tag posted here seems to indicate that Ryan was ordered to cut payroll by 33M over 2 years... Perhaps I misunderstood due to the context, but given that Ryan has publically said he didn't have orders to reduce payroll, I'd be rather upset if in fact he did.

 

I don't have too much of a problem with rebuilding, though I think it is in everyone's best interest to be HONEST about that fact, and if Corriea is simply a signing to hold a place until that happens, I don't get too upset by it (I'd be more upset if the FO actually thought he'd be an upgrade).

 

Looking at the market, I'd definitely say that I don't see a whole lot of sure upgrades in the middle infield. I'm not so certain about pitching. There were plenty of much better options that could have filled that void, whether that meant signing Sanchez to a 5 year deal or going for a bunch of higher upside 1 year wonders. I'd argue with the next wave, a 5 year deal on a guy like Sanchez doesn't hurt this franchize at all, but even if Ryan was allergic to that, there were plenty of 1 year deals that made a ton of sense.

[jokin]

 

 

Let's see. Color? Marcum is shut down. McCarthy is at least as much of an injury risk as Pelfry, isn't he? So, while it APPEARS that signing Marcum and McCarthy instead of Pelfry and Correia would be better, we just don't know. Perhaps there's some color beyond a list of free agents that we didn't sign that even you aren't privy to.

 

Reciting a bunch of statistics doesn't make you right and someone else wrong.

 

Oh really? Mets aim for Shaun Marcum to pitch 6th game of season | Boston Herald

 

Reciting statistics rather than just making stuff up out of whole cloth usually gives one a better chance of being right.

 

No one's arguing that all 4 players don't involve a set of risks, of course we don't know for sure how this plays out. But the upside in taking Marcum and McCarthy over who the Twins signed instead is pretty obvious to (almost) everyone.

[jokin]

I'm also generally positive about the Pelfrey signing. Not my first choice but also not a bad one.

 

2 years with a team option (especially instead of Correia) would have been just about the right way to go. Pelfrey's first year performance coming out of TJ has to be the biggest question mark of the Rotation. Usually the 2nd year back is the good one.

[Guest USAFChief]

100% coincidence. I know it's hard not to believe there isn't a master plan in place to cut spending, because spending has gone down two years in a row now. As unpopular as it is on his site, I still believe that, when the circumstance warrant the spending to increase, it will. Two different points of view, both arrived at honestly.

 

OK, let's have it, Chief. Accuse me of spinning the facts and sereptitiously working for the Twins.

It would seem to me your second point (spending will go up when justified) negates your first point (there was no plan to cut payroll now). No?

[Guest USAFChief]

Fair enough. But teams don't disclose this for liability reasons. So there ain't no source. But that's the nature of these discussions. We're not dealing with concrete facts on either side of the argument. But I will take Rosenthal's report over nothing.

This conversation all goes back to your contention Marcum didn't throw off a mound this winter, and Pelfry did. Teams can't disclose whether pitchers throw off a mound for liability reasons? That's absurd on its face, not to mention, then how do you know Pelfry did?

[bird]

What warrants increased spending, just curious?

 

A fair question of course, mike. My thinking is this: You can only make so much incremental improvement using the "build from within for the most part" strategy. (You have argued persuasively about the demerits of this strategy, but it is what it is). So, because they're not ready to contend for two years, why not save your bullets? Give the fans a "competitive" team in 2013, but not a contending team, and suffer the temporary fallout. Be a seller for prospects, at the deadline and over the winter, this year and next, be patient, build your system. Then, when the time comes, you can strike like you did with Sano for example.

 

I could be wrong. It's an unpopular stance on this site. I respect the arguments from those who think differently, although I get irritated by the demonizing of people by those brave souls on here who, when the table is turned and THEY are criticized, have a thin skin.

[Mr. Brooks]

A fair question of course, mike. My thinking is this: You can only make so much incremental improvement using the "build from within for the most part" strategy. (You have argued persuasively about the demerits of this strategy, but it is what it is). So, because they're not ready to contend for two years, why not save your bullets? Give the fans a "competitive" team in 2013, but not a contending team, and suffer the temporary fallout. Be a seller for prospects, at the deadline and over the winter, this year and next, be patient, build your system. Then, when the time comes, you can strike like you did with Sano for example.

 

I could be wrong. It's an unpopular stance on this site. I respect the arguments from those who think differently, although I get irritated by the demonizing of people by those brave souls on here who, when the table is turned and THEY are criticized, have a thin skin.

 

But are they actually saving their bullets, or just pocketing them?

That would be my question. Are we going to see them go $20 million OVER budget when the time comes to compete, or are they just going to max out AT budget?

Because if they just max out at budget when that time comes, then they didn't really save their bullets for anything, they just pocketed them.

 

Also, if this is giving us a "competitive" team for 2013, I'd hate to see what they consider a non competitive team. IMO, the only thing we will be competing with is the Marlins, Astros, and Rockies for the #1 draft pick next June.

[Highabove]

When any Franchise cuts close to 40 million dollars off their payroll in just two years, fingers are going to be pointed towards the Owner.

For some reason, there is a hands off the Pohlad's policy in this Town.

[ThePuck]

But are they actually saving their bullets, or just pocketing them?

That would be my question. Are we going to see them go $20 million OVER budget when the time comes to compete, or are they just going to max out AT budget?

Because if they just max out at budget when that time comes, then they didn't really save their bullets for anything, they just pocketed them.

 

The budget will be even smaller by next year and the next and the next...all these new guys coming in from the minors replacing what few high priced players we have left...they'll guys will be playing for under 1M for at least a couple years. We aren't going to make big FA signings...

[Highabove]

Just to put the Payroll issue into perspective

CBS Sports

Team Act. Payroll Adjustments Tot. Payroll

N.Y. Yankees $232,058,561 -$3,062,616 $228,995,945

Los Angeles Dodgers 221,867,195 -5,564,286 216,302,909

Philadelphia 170,353,189 -10,774,975 159,578,214

Boston 152,028,000 6,939,286 158,967,286

Detroit 146,989,500 2,057,344 149,046,844

San Francisco 140,180,333 2,000,000 142,180,333

Los Angeles Angels 128,165,250 14,000,000 142,165,250

Texas 114,322,600 12,874,975 127,197,575

Chicago White Sox 120,065,277 4,000,000 124,065,277

Toronto 118,527,800 -283,761 118,244,039

St. Louis 116,202,085 500,000 116,702,085

Washington 114,194,270 -1,762,500 112,431,770

Cincinnati 111,254,462 -688,734 110,565,728

Chicago Cubs 103,550,726 600,000 104,150,726

Baltimore 90,293,333 1,500,000 91,793,333

Milwaukee 88,753,366 2,250,000 91,003,366

Arizona 90,650,500 -492,000 90,158,500

Atlanta 89,496,526 -208,333 89,288,193

New York Mets 71,943,054 16,933,979 88,877,033

Seattle 74,705,043 9,590,909 84,295,952

Cleveland 76,267,300 6,250,000 82,517,300

Kansas City 80,741,725 -250,000 80,491,725

Minnesota 75,312,500 250,000 75,562,500

Colorado 74,899,071 550,000 75,449,071

San Diego 68,189,900 3,500,000 71,689,900

Oakland 63,994,500 4,582,500 68,577,000

Pittsburgh 80,055,000 -13,765,476 66,289,524

Tampa Bay 55,955,272 1,075,000 57,030,272

Miami 32,121,900 7,500,000 39,621,900

Houston 18,707,800 5,620,738 24,328,538

 

2013 Baseball Payrolls, Preliminary List - MLB - CBSSports.com News, Rumors, Scores, Stats, Fantasy Advice

 

 

[bird]

It would seem to me your second point (spending will go up when justified) negates your first point (there was no plan to cut payroll now). No?

 

No. Why would it? Ryan said he had leeway to spend. He didn't spend. Was this planned, or did circumstances arise that influenced Ryan's judgment? Why would you assume this is because of some directive from Jim Pohlad? I'm assuming it wasn't because of a directive because both Jim Pohlad and Terry Ryan said so. Yeah, I know. They're a couple of thieving no-good lying scumbags, and I'm their PR guy.

[bird]

But are they actually saving their bullets, or just pocketing them?

That would be my question. Are we going to see them go $20 million OVER budget when the time comes to compete, or are they just going to max out AT budget?

Because if they just max out at budget when that time comes, then they didn't really save their bullets for anything, they just pocketed them.

 

Also, if this is giving us a "competitive" team for 2013, I'd hate to see what they consider a non competitive team. IMO, the only thing we will be competing with is the Marlins, Astros, and Rockies for the #1 draft pick next June.

 

I known I'm in an extreme minority, Mr. Brooks, but I really do believe that, sometime down the line, you'll see them go way over budget to retain star players and add a missing piece or two via the FA market. Unprecedented, I know, but I trust this organization at a time when distrust is understandably at a peak.

 

And 2013? I'd define 75-78 wins as competitive, winning close to half the time and not being out of it by 7 runs in the top of the third every damn game.

[Mr. Brooks]

I known I'm in an extreme minority, Mr. Brooks, but I really do believe that, sometime down the line, you'll see them go way over budget to retain star players and add a missing piece or two via the FA market. Unprecedented, I know, but I trust this organization at a time when distrust is understandably at a peak.

 

And 2013? I'd define 75-78 wins as competitive, winning close to half the time and not being out of it by 7 runs in the top of the third every damn game.

 

I guess I can't understand what would make you think they will do that, considering they didnt do that last time they had a competitive team, and it was VERY clear that they needed one or two more pieces to make a WS run.

 

And I'll send Gardy a Christmas card if he finds a way to win 78 games with this roster.

[bird]

When any Franchise cuts close to 40 million dollars off their payroll in just two years, fingers are going to be pointed towards the Owner.

For some reason, there is a hands off the Pohlad's policy in this Town.

 

That's certainly not the policy on THIS site, is it? I defend a lot of the decisions and actions of ownership and management, but I don't object to fair criticism and opposing views. I object to the often vicious personal attacks and unfair and distorted characterizations. I wish people wouldn't type what they wouldn't have the balls to say to their subject's face.

[bird]

I guess I can't understand what would make you think they will do that, considering they didnt do that last time they had a competitive team, and it was VERY clear that they needed one or two more pieces to make a WS run.

 

And I'll send Gardy a Christmas card if he finds a way to win 78 games with this roster.

 

Because this time they have the Target Field revenues, and they'll have socked away some cash while being under budget for four years.

 

I'll send Ryan the card then. Ryan thinks 78 wins. I think 70.

[Highabove]

That's certainly not the policy on THIS site, is it? I defend a lot of the decisions and actions of ownership and management, but I don't object to fair criticism and opposing views. I object to the often vicious personal attacks and unfair and distorted characterizations. I wish people wouldn't type what they wouldn't have the balls to say to their subject's face.

 

Vicious Attacks?? I'm stating what the reality would be in the other Markets.

I also believe that the media gives the Twins ownership a softer ride then the other three owners.

[cmathewson]

This conversation all goes back to your contention Marcum didn't throw off a mound this winter, and Pelfry did. Teams can't disclose whether pitchers throw off a mound for liability reasons? That's absurd on its face, not to mention, then how do you know Pelfry did?

 

That's not what I meant. There were health reasons that kept teams from signing Marcum. Said health reasons could have easily been cleared up with a tryout. For wahtever reason, that didn't happen. I don't know why.