Brock Beauchamp

Possibly not but he's also using a fair amount of hindsight. Sure, the Sanchez signing would have been great but how do you choose that guy and is he even interested? Remember, the Tigers traded for Sanchez and he resigned with the team because he enjoyed Detroit. It appears he mostly ignored the FA market and took a reasonable deal that was probably worth less than he would have received on the open market. The Span deal is another example. It was considered a fair trade at the time but unfortunately, it hasn't panned out for the Twins. Couple the Revere trade and we're getting into a quite revisionist form of history. If the Twins have Span, do the Phillies demand him (probably offering more in the process) and ignore Revere? Remove one key element and we can't expect the same events to cascade into place quite so gracefully. And then Hunter. Yeah, he's a former Twin but does he sign with the team if it's coming off a 75 win season? He was old and knew the Tigers were his last shot at contention. It's easy to look back and say "I would have done this" but without context of everything else happening at the time, it's hard to take it too seriously. With that said, I like a lot of what Markos is saying and many of his moves are defensible, both now and in context of the situation when it happened (mostly his "don't do this" arguments)... But not all of it, particularly the biggest moves he mentioned. And without those big moves, the Twins are still a very, very bad team. I just glanced over the pitching FAs in 2012 and outside of Sanchez and Greinke, they were pretty much all failures.

That's my point, though. The Jays' high water mark was 86 wins. No matter which division you play, that's going to miss the playoffs the majority of the time. If you don't like the Jays comp, let's look at an ALC team that takes a similar approach to Toronto: the White Sox. Since winning the WS, their high water mark is 89 games, which earned them a 163 playoff and a quick exit from the postseason. They try to compete every year yet have one (bad) postseason appearance to show for it. The only mid-market team that seems capable of sustaining success is the Cardinals and they might be the most well-run franchise in baseball. For the majority of teams, I believe the ebb and flow approach gives you the best chance of going deep into the postseason.

While I agree that your plan is pretty sound and keeps the team "in contention", is that really a good thing? As we've seen with past Jays teams, hovering around .500 in perpetuity leads to some really uninspiring baseball. I would have taken almost the opposite tack you did. After 2011, I would have dismantled the team as thoroughly as possible. Stop spending money. Pick up flyers like Kazmir, Marcum, and hope you strike gold, fueling midseason trades. Stay away from the Correias and Pelfreys and other "warm bodies". Every move is about two things: being bad in the short-term and filling the minors with prospects. Basically, the Houston Astros approach. In year three, start picking up a few small pieces. In year four, pick up nicer pieces. I don't believe it's possible for a mid-market team to stay in contention for over a decade (and, by and large, the Twins had been contenders for a decade going into 2011). I believe there has to be an ebb and flow to how you treat the roster. If the team is bad, blow it up quickly and try to move the window of a rebuild to three years, not 4-5 years. Don't try to work around a depleted farm system in hopes you can win 85 games and sneak into the playoffs if everything breaks right, blow that **** up and try to patch together 3-4 season runs of 90+ wins.

Yeah, it's hard to imagine a situation where that worked out better for the Twins. It's unlikely Cuddyer brings back a consensus #10-15 prospect in all of baseball.

I'm not underselling May. I think he's a good pitcher with good upside but he simply does not have the stuff to be a real ace. It's likely May will have a better career than Meyer but Meyer has a better chance to become an ace. He has the nasty stuff to do it, he just hasn't put it together (and probably won't). May doesn't. He'd need a few more MPH on his fastball, a better breaking ball, etc. That's not a knock on May, a pitcher can be very good and very valuable without being an ace.

While that's a significant difference to note most of the time, in the context of a Libertarianism viewpoint (ie. this discussion), it doesn't really matter.

Yeah, exactly. I was just reading up on how Cruz thinks Apple should comply with the FBI's demands to create a back door to iOS. Oddly enough, Rubio disagrees. I was a bit surprised to discover that tidbit. Ted Cruz. Definitely (not) a Libertarian.

Thank you. Marcum was the name I was trying to remember earlier in the thread.

I find the Republican usurping of "Libertarian ideals" interesting. Libertarianism, for good or bad, is based on the principle "I'll do what I want". The twisted Republican version is based on "you'll do what I want".

Agreed. I've mentioned it a few times but I'm not that hard to please. There are plenty of things I disagree with but am intrigued enough with the move to still be interested in it and what it signifies to the roster. Park and Murphy fall into this category. But I really struggle with "nothing".

All valid points.

I see this said a lot but I can't really agree with it. If you're a team looking for mid-season help, how much more are you willing to give up for a Liriano, Morneau, or Willingham if the other team tacks on $3-4m? In my eyes, it's not much. Instead of getting the 14th best prospect, they offer up their 12th best prospect. On the other hand, the Twins just handed away $3-4m for a prospect who might be worth a handful of dollars more than the prospect they'd receive without giving up a dime. Sure, it's not my money and all that but that's a pretty bad deal for the Twins. They're handing away millions to get thousands in return. Now, this might work on occasion when a team is searching the couch cushions for mid-season cash but I suspect that situation arises infrequently. If it comes down to $2-3m and a late-season run, what owner isn't going to spring for that cash? It's likely they'll make it right back in fan attendance in August and September as everyone comes to watch a competitive team make a run at the postseason (never mind the increased ticket sales and revenue that bleed into the following season). This argument seems like a good idea in theory but I don't think it's quite that cut-and-dry in reality.

I don't have a problem with them ignoring the RHP market. Between May, Duffey, Burdi, and Meyer, there's enough RHP upside to adequately fill the pen (or at least cross your fingers and hope it works out, the talent is certainly there). But not picking up a real lefty solution is a problem for me.

There was a slight upside guy available that year (who bombed spectacularly, IIRC), I simply can't recall his name. Someone out there probably remembers who it was. Those guys are always available and the Twins pursued none of them. If you want to pick up Correia and a flyer, that's okay, too... But going with non-upside guy when the team is expected to win 60-something games is a bad strategy because fans don't care if a team wins 61 or 68 games. If you're gonna be bad no matter what, roll the dice a few times. It's not like there's much to lose in that situation. edit: it's not who I was thinking of but Kazmir was available that offseason, I believe.

BTW, this article is fantastic and points out bad tendencies fans tout in losing seasons. When the Twins were really bad, I was also (mostly) fine with their spending. The only thing that was going to drag the team out of its sinkhole was prospects and lots of 'em. On the other hand, I hated the Correia signing. If your team is going to be bad, take risks. Instead of going after Correia - a known commodity whose ceiling is "I just threw up in my mouth a little" - go for someone like Brett Anderson (yes, the timeline doesn't match up, just fill in another player's name if you don't like the Anderson reference). An injured player with real upside. Worst case scenario, he stinks or doesn't play. Who cares? You're expected to suck anyway. Best case scenario, wow, he's really good! Keep him or trade him at that point, whatever. Finding a warm body is rarely the best solution in my eyes. Not only is a "warm body" unlikely to change the team's fortunes at all, it sucks to watch from a fan perspective. I'm not going to buy tickets to watch Kevin Correia pitch because he's Kevin ****ing Correia. Now to the present: I'm completely fine with the Twins avoiding elite relievers but that's due to years, not dollars. But for crying out loud, pick up somebody. I'm not a tough sell. Make it look like you're trying. Even if I disagree with any particular move - the Murphy trade and Park acquisitions are decent examples of this - I'll show some excitement that something happened and will look forward to the upcoming season. But it's really hard to rally behind nothing.

While I hate May in the bullpen, Berrios has a better chance of becoming an ace. Hell, I'd argue that Meyer has a better chance of becoming an ace. Trevor May has almost zero chance of becoming an ace. His ceiling is a very good #2 if everything breaks right. That's an extremely valuable pitcher - and one that should be in the rotation - but it's not an ace by any definition other than "the guy who starts on Opening Day". A Brad Radke-style "ace", that is.

Don't feel bad, it felt like the guy was on the team for an eternity, every moment of it excruciatingly painful. But in reality, he really didn't pitch much.

The Stauffer signing was bad but too much was made out of his playing time. He received 10 innings and then went on the DL to see if he could straighten things out. He returned to the team, pitched 5.1 additional innings, and got the axe. The Twins moved at an acceptable pace with Stauffer, it just seemed like a really long time due to his month long DL stint. Of course, they never should have signed the guy in the first place but that's a different argument, really.

Unfortunately, the Twins have put themselves in the position where mediocre starters are forcing their hand in the pen. So many of these problems fall back to the rotation and the fact there are too many (not very good) warm bodies. If the rotation had 5-6 pitchers, it'd be a hell of a lot easier to get Meyer and Burdi on the Minnesota roster (which is part of the reason why I wanted to see Milone traded this offseason).

Not multiple veterans at once. That's a tall order... But hopefully they'll start rotating the young guys in one at a time in May (if not Spring Training). If the bullpen is full of young pitchers in July, I'll find it hard to complain too much.

It allows you to save a few bucks on jerseys? Really, though, I don't understand most of the action/non-action surrounding the bullpen. Outside of offering arb to Jepsen I don't know if I agree with a single move. Well, maybe Abad as a third or fourth option. That was fine, I suppose.

I don't fault Ryan for passing over some of the early action, as much of it seemed overpriced and competing in a seller's market is a bad way to run a baseball team most of the time. But nothing? Ugh... When Bastardo went to the Mets for 2/$12m, that was a tough pill for me to swallow.

I'm looking forward to hearing more about Benghazi, as I feel that subject has flown under the radar a bit.

http://www.todayifoundout.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/burned-at-the-stake.jpg

I simply don't understand how someone can talk about a team weakness and then make no attempt to shore up that deficiency in a meaningful way. As I said earlier, if Ryan has secret plans to usher in the Meyer/Burdi era on Opening Day, that makes this decision more palatable... But I'm skeptical that will happen, particularly with Burdi (and I'd like to see Meyer get one more shot at starting). Which means this bullpen's ceiling is "acceptable" with a floor of "my eyes, they're bleeding".