Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

twinsnorth49

Old-Timey Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    11,778

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    44

 Content Type 

Profiles

Minnesota Twins News, Rumors & Analysis

Minnesota Twins Videos

2026 Minnesota Twins Top Prospect Rankings

2022 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

Minnesota Twins Trade & Free Agent Rumors

Minnesota Twins Fan Guides & Resources

2023 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

The Minnesota Twins Players Project

2024 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

2025 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

2026 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

Forums

Blogs

Events

Store

Downloads

Gallery

Everything posted by twinsnorth49

  1. twinsnorth49
    The Trophy Pickerel is off the board, the only big one left to me is Sanchez, don't think he's going to be worth the price the bait will cost now. Jackson and Marcum are Northern's at best and Dempster is merely a channel cat. Northern's aren't too hard to catch, but you need to have a rod in the water with the right lure, the former might be true for TR but likely not the latter.
  2. twinsnorth49
    http://www.websmileys.com/sm/mad/1335.gif
  3. twinsnorth49
    I concur, only the most cynical believe that the organization doesn't have a plan beyond lining their pockets. The club could definitely be more transparent and consistent in communicating what that plan is to the fan base, but just because they don't doesn't mean there isn't one. I'd rather believe the team is carefully considering the best way to move forward, either pay a boatload of money for some good (not great) help now or keep stockpiling the cupboard and spend the money when those players graduate on some key veteran pieces. I'm willing to accept I could be totally wrong but because I don't know any better than anyone else, I prefer the wait and see approach. The Bilderbergs run the World Government, not the Trilateral Commission, no wait there the same thing,or are they? Conspiracy indeed.
  4. twinsnorth49
    The dislike has nothing to do with him being a great guy or not, it has to do with him being a not so great pitcher. It's not personal.
  5. twinsnorth49
    At this rate the Tigers are going to have to give Verlander 5/250 when he's due. Good grief! If this is where the rate is set for the front line market, hello John Lannan.
  6. twinsnorth49
    All the Tigers in Africa couldn't beat up Justin Morneau.
  7. twinsnorth49
    Different ideas and philosophies? How so?
  8. twinsnorth49
    You're right, it's far more fun to sit around nervously wondering whether Meyer or May will turn into Manship than get excited about them. The only similarities between them is that they all have names that start with M.
  9. twinsnorth49
    The fact that 2 teams only offered him 2 years and he turned them down should give you your answer.........which should be no.
  10. twinsnorth49
    You know, you have to think the Twins were considering the Span and Revere moves well before the season ended (Span we know for sure), at least the possibility that if something came up, they would be more than willing to listen. Which makes me wonder even further as to why Hicks didn't get a call-up in September. A month under his belt in the majors would have served him well for what he is likely going to be facing at some point next season.
  11. twinsnorth49
    Yeah... but... You are from Canada. You have a Bear, Loon, Elk and Beaver on your coins and you bring them down to the states and they get mixed in at the convenience store and they end up in my pocket and they don't work in our Soda Machine. That strangely pleases me, consider it my contribution to the fight against obesity in the US.
  12. twinsnorth49
    I for one am not s**tting you, Blackburn sucks balls (figuratively , not a homophobic slur). The mere fact we would have to hope he comes back to be respectable, would be proof enough that we're f***ed!
  13. twinsnorth49
    They can not possibly believe Mastro can be a full-timer, even in a transitional season, can they? I don't believe they do, indications are that at best he's some sort of stop-gap for Hicks, Benson or Arcia until May or June.
  14. twinsnorth49
    Hoping Blackburn "Bounces back" is definitely the "Wing and a Prayer" method to fixing the rotation. Nothing says success like a fly ball inducing sinker baller.
  15. twinsnorth49
    That line never gets old. I disagree, yes it has!
  16. twinsnorth49
    One word, why?
  17. twinsnorth49
    It's really strange... I can't describe it... I'm pumped about two decent arms coming to us... And floored at.the reality of the loss of my favorite Twin. You'll be fine once you see Worley get us out of the 2nd inning in his first start RB.
  18. twinsnorth49
    Jackpot!! A bit stunned TR was able to get this for Revere but as someone pointed out in another thread, Revere has that visual flash that makes some people ignore what he really is, I think that's what played out here and what makes this such a steal for the Twins, definitely got the better value. Getting excited people! Who's next? http://www.websmileys.com/sm/cool/653.gif
  19. twinsnorth49
    Snark.....here? By who, when? I'm disappointed. http://www.websmileys.com/sm/mad/011.gif
  20. twinsnorth49
    Not gonna do it, wouldn't be prudent.
  21. twinsnorth49
    I think most people just have an issue with 3 years guaranteed, he will be 38 by then. I would happily go along with the above suggestions, just not for 3 years, I think the risk of a precipitous decline in the 3rd is too great.
  22. twinsnorth49
    I think Revere's arm is overplayed. Does it hurt the team? Sure, any weak arm in RF/CF is going to hurt the team. Is it significant enough to matter enough to use as an argument to discount his range? Probably not. I'm fine with Revere's defense; I think it's the rest of his game that will hold him back. I wish the best for the guy but I've seen too many players like him stall out in their late 20s. He's a bad bet for extension. That's all. Agree with this 100%, the weak arm angle is way overplayed, I watch just about every game and didn't see nearly as many "parties" going on between 1st and 3rd, it's being greatly exaggerated, sorry. He's a classic flame out type player though, there is a laundry list of guys who profile just like him that came before and ended up in the "I can't run as fast anymore" trash heap. I don't see much point in extending at this point, love to watch him play at times for now.
  23. twinsnorth49
    It's not about overpaying for Dempster or anyone else, it's about overpaying Dempster for 3 years being wrong. I'm under no illusion it's going to cost to get what we want and we need to pay it, I'm saying what we want shouldn't be Dempster for 3 years.
  24. twinsnorth49
    While I hate getting into payroll debates, it's worth noting that the Twins went over their budget in 2010 to get Pavano in January. $112m isn't really a fair baseline to use, as it was a conscious overspending based on a specific opportunity. Yeah, I don't get it, and the constant bitching about payroll gives me tired head. We aren't even in Janurary yet, now is not the time to worry about total payroll. I do know one thing, spending money for the sole sake of spending money is a really bad idea, especially when you are talking long term deals. At this point I'm much more worried about our payroll obligations for 2014/2015 then I am for 2013. In a perfect world the Twins would sign a top tier pitcher to a long term deal, and any of the guys who project to be #4/#5's be brought it on one year deals and potentially a two year deal as long as it isn't to expensive. At the end of the day: Give me Hendriks as our #5 then giving a guy like Dempster 3 years, as there actually is a pretty decent chance Hendriks gives you similar value for about 12 million+ less a year. Getting somewhat back to the original topic, Hendriks is a way better gamble as similar value as a back end guy than 3/39 for Dempster, no brainer in my opinion. Getting Dempster on those terms definitely fits into the spending money to spend money philosophy.
  25. twinsnorth49
    Exactly.. Completely wrong, actually. There is a finite amount of money available for the Twins to spend on payroll, and that doesn't just fluctuate year to year. Saving one year may mean spending another year. To say that you know exactly what the Twins' payroll plans are for the coming several years is just wrong. You don't. Cool, so we should expect the Twins to spend that saved 18M the saved last year from 2011 payroll? Twins spent 112M in 2011, 94M in 2012, so will they A: not only got back to 112M, but add an additional 1*M they saved? Or B: just go up to 112 again? Or is it neither? Sounds like a rhetorical question. Why don't you spare us the condescension and let us know?
×
×
  • Create New...