JB_Iowa

Apparently Torii Hunter had a similar religious upbringing to mine. And regardless of what the writer may have said, MANY main stream Christian churches do not consider gay behavior to be acceptable. That does not mean that they condemn a person for being gay but it does mean that they believe that sexual acts should be within the confines of marriage between 2 persons of the opposite sex -- thus sex between persons of the same gender is unacceptable in the same way that adultery is unacceptable. And yes, an openly gay teammate has the potential to be very divisive on a team. There's a reason that there are red and blue states and moral issues such as this one are part of the "great divide". And as much as I may vote like a liberal when it comes right down to it on a personal level, my religious upbringing is pretty hard to ignore. That doesn't mean I hate gays but it also doesn't mean that I'm comfortable with gay behavior.

While I don't have a big problem with them refusing to overpay for pitching this year (although as NIck notes, where is the line that denotes overpaying?), I strongly believe that they would refuse to "overpay" even if the rest of the team looked good (LEN3 touches on this). THAT is a huge problem for me. The fact of the matter is that the Twins and pitching are just not a happy marriage -- they haven't been good at drafting it; they seem mediocre at developing it; and they refuse to pay much for it. So overall, it doesn't make me very hopeful about this team -- even if the team is improved several years from now and works its way back to "contender" status -- because I believe that they will do the same thing they have always done and "skimp" on pitching and will only ever be groomsmen and never the groom. I hope that they prove me wrong. But until they do, I think that I -- and all other fans -- should remain skeptical.

Merry Christmas! And please don't drink all 10 beers at one game.

What I see are a number of posters trying to convince us (and possibly themselves) that this rotation won't be "that bad". Well, guess what? Before the Baker need for TJ surgery last year, many people thought that rotation wouldn't be "that bad" -- there were even some who predicted that the improvements to the Twins hitting might be good enough to put them in the playoffs (MLB Predictions 2012: Why the Minnesota Twins Can Make the Playoffs | Bleacher Report) Well, I'm not going to drink the Kool-Aid again. Sure, there's a possibility that this rotation will be better than last year (and heaven knows, given how many minor leaguers the Twins had to bring up to start last season, it SHOULD be better) but even if it is better, how MUCH better? Enough to account for the losses of Span and Revere? I have no problem with those trades -- I'm in favor of a complete rebuild -- but HOW does ANYTHING that Ryan did this off-season with a fair amount of money available to him significantly improve this team for 2013 OR for the future. His purchases in the free agent market aren't likely to be anything that can be turned into something better in the future nor do they do much for this year. AND he has seemingly left a pool of money on the table (at least thus far) that might have allowed him to purchase something better (even if it was a position player or two rather than a pitcher). Terry Ryan did okay with the trades but his penurious ways in the free agent market continue to be frustrating. This team may talk about the 50+% rule when they are using it as a "cap" -- but c'mon Mr. St. Peter, let's hear you talking about it now that Mr. Ryan seems to be ignoring it when putting in a floor. He still has several weeks to redeem himself but as of right now, Mr. Ryan gets a great big D or F when it comes to free agent acquisitions.

Thanks for posting the link for those of us who are too navigationally challenged to find it on our own. And thanks for all of your work keeping this updated .... even if I do find the state of the Twins roster to be incredibly depressing.

Good article, Nick. Taken by itself, there's nothing wrong with this signing and there does seem to be some potential for upside (of course, there's also potential for downside but that's the whole point of taking a flier). It appears that Ryan's approach to building a starting staff is now the same as the Twins traditional approach to building a buillpen -- just get enough options and something will work out. It has worked most of the time for the Twins BP but there have been some notable exceptions. I guess we'll see whether it works for building a starting staff. I just want to see some action on the remaining $15-$25m that is available to him this offseason. Either purchase some assets that might be helpful down the road or publicly commit to carrying over that money for future use. Either the team needs to abide by its own 50+% policy or they need to publicly acknowledge that they have abandoned it. No spin on this, Mr. St. Peter.

Well, I didn't expect him to spend $30 million but even in the pre-Span trade days, I did expect him to spend around $15m and we're not there. I was just hoping that the $$$ would bring back a little better return. I have no problem with the Pelfrey signing taken by itself. And I'm not even that concerned about how horrific the 2013 rotation will be. I AM concerned about the Twins overall budget and the return they are getting for their free agency money. I'm assuming that the budget, as it now stands, is still less than $75m. Since I have NO faith that the TR will "carry over" about $15-$25m to put the payroll in the 50% range (as the Twins self-servingly have always previously said they are doing), I'm waiting to see him spend that money either to make a significant improvement in the pitching staff for 2013 OR to sign several position players who will not only improve the team for 2013 but who may be "flippable" for more prospects down the road. Your feet are to the fire, Ebenezer Ryan.

Could someone post the link to the spreadsheet again? I can't seem to find it. Thanks.

And people wondered why more and more posters moved to the "dark side" even before the off-season? Some of us would simply rather be "pleasantly surprised" than to get kicked in the teeth again. Yes, there is still time and a few limited opportunities for Terry Ryan to salvage this off-season but as of right now, things don't look good. And, ironically, that's true whether -- before the offseason -- you hoped for a complete rebuild OR you thought they could be competitive in 2013.

Should have realized that based on the poster. My main thought when reading Nick's article was that the Twins have again defined ironic (moronic, too?). Team that most needs starting pitching AND has the money to buy some and does little.

Depends on how you define legitimate. The Twins always have an explanation -- believability of the explanation depends on the mindset of the listener.

Please let there be 1 (pleasant) unexpected surprise in that group!

Well, you won't get ripped by me. And I appreciate your observation on "reallocation" rather than "spending". I hope Jim Crikket is on a nice vacation somewhere because I've really missed him on the Twins recent actions (or lack thereof) -- waiting to see if he has another good rant in him if payroll ends up less than $85m.

Glynn seems kind of old to be getting his first major league managing job. I also don't see what's in his resume that someone hiring would find so fascinating. Not saying he'd be bad, just that there's probably 100 other guys just like him and a bit younger so if he succeeds he'll be around a good long while. I think Molitor is older than Gardenhire or Glynn (looked this up a while ago and didn't go back today). They are all actually quite similar in age. Yes, Molitor has the HOF credentials but I'm not sure that matters too much in managing -- and he has less recent experience (despite the special instructor role --or whatever it is called). I'm not advocating for Glynn but I don't think age is a reason to disqualify him.

Bingo! What hit me yesterday were the comments on the Pirates blog about Correia being fine if you were talking about your 6th or 7th guy for depth but that he shouldn't be part of your "planned 5" as Chief calls them. He is not only part of Ryan's "planned 5" but I would submit that he is part of Ryan's "planned 3". As I've said elsewhere, I was heartened by the Span and Revere trades. Thus far, I'm disheartened with their planned spending. I would either like to see them acquire a FA starter who would actually be league average or above OR I would like to see them acquire some other pieces that might later be flipped for more prospects (a la Willingham last year although they haven't flipped him yet). So far I just see them spending a bit of money with not very good results. Still in wait and see mode.

LEN 3 has a column on Twins pitching prospects. Twins' search for free-agent pitching isn't over yet | StarTribune.com He acknowledges that the Twins have "shown interest" in John Lannan, Joe Saunders and Brett Meyers then proceeds to name the potential starting pitchers in the system. He concludes with the following quote from Terry Ryan: "We've got numbers." Ryan said. "It's just a matter of who is going to emerge. Some guys will be injured. Some will fall by the wayside. Some won't be ready. But we have to have numbers." He did say prior to that quote that Ryan was waiting for the free agent market to heat up (which Ryan thinks will happen soon) but count me as less than impressed with that final quote from Mr. Ryan.

I HOPE that some other team fires its manager early to mid-season and then "lures" Gardenhire away from the Twins. I wish Gardenhire well but I do think its time for a change. And I don't think that it's time for Paul Molitor. I, too, think that ship has sailed.

It seems to me that there were a number of people who had high hopes that the Twins would sign 2 pitchers in FA who were better than average (or at least 1 better than average and 1 average) -- and some were actually hoping for 3. I never had those expectations so this is less disappointing to me than it may be to some others. I've been pleased with the trades Ryan made because I've wanted them to start rebuilding since October 2010 BUT my eye continues to be on the bottom line. No one should be blithely accepting of a payroll at $75-$80 million unless the Twins make it VERY clear that they are no longer adhering to the 50% policy AND are, in fact, harboring some of unspent portion of their savings for use down the road (and, if that is the case, then they had darn well better be spending significantly more than 50% when it comes to 2014, 2015 and later [and yes, I realize that is a Catch-22 in that 50% may be less dollars if attendance continues to decline although the extra $25m in split TV revenues will help]). I realize that I'm like a broken record on this point but IF the Twins continue to maintain that they are adhering to the 50+% rule THEN, if they won't (or can't) put it into some decent starting pitching, they darn well need to be seeking out upgrades & values at some of their positions that might later be flipped for more prospects.

Question; is it just the 95 losses that makes it difficult to lure pitchers? What effect (if any) does it have that Rick Anderson is the Twins pitching coach? What effect (if any) does it have that Rick Anderson MAY only be the pitching coach for 2013 and that Ron Gardenhire MAY only be the manager for 2013? What effect does the organization's prior pitching philosophy have (and is that philosophy gone)? What effect does the organization's historical stinginess on free agent pitching (and, for that matter, on extensions) have? I don't think its JUST the 95 losses that make pitchers reluctant to sign in Minnesota. Gut feeling is that there's a whole slew of factors at play but that's all it is, a gut feeling.

Oh, what I'd give to know what unsuccessful offers the Twins have made. Did they simply misread the market and fail to open the checkbook when middle-tier pitchers were signing early or are pitchers really that adverse to signing in Minnesota? Are they now just desperate? Are they trying to keep the payroll below $85 million. How I wish I knew what was really going on here.

The Twins created certain expectations by their repeated reference to the 50+% rule through the years. I've suggested previously that it may make sense to have a payroll of less than 50% while rebuilding while expending more than 50% once the team matures. That approach makes sense to me. But given this franchise's repeated prior references to the 50% rule, they CANNOT do this in a vacuum. If they are to have any credibility with fans, they must explain what they are doing and then they must follow through on that spending plan as time goes along. Even if they do that, many fans are going to doubt their sincerity that they would later spend current savings. Like it or not, Terry Ryan and the Pohlads have a reputation for being cheap (and that reputation was strengthened when Jim Pohlad made it pretty clear that he replaced Bill Smith because Smith wanted to keep the budget at $110m+). I actually expect this whole discussion to be moot. I don't think the Twins will significantly change their approach to the 50% rule. I do expect payroll to be in the $91 million - $94 million range. (Although I admittedly wouldn't be too surprised if it came in at $85-$90 m)

As I have said in the past, I would not have a problem with the Twins "harboring" money to be used toward free agent signings in a future year BUT that is a HUGE change in their "modus operandi" and would require a DEFINITIVE STATEMENT on their part that it is in fact, what they are doing and that they will no longer be adhering to the 50% (or 52% or whatever it is) rule. As someone mentioned above, the baseball world is changed -- there are slots for what you pay players acquired in the draft and there is a governing system for what you can spend internationally (yes, you can overspend but the penalities are much more than I ever envision the Twins being willing to pay). The one other area where I can see that a "pool" of money can be used is in the bidding system for international players (a la Yu Darvish or god forbid, Nishioka). Reasonable fans (or taxpayers) would not (and should not) assume that any reduction in payroll will be used in the future. The Twins would have to make it clear that the monies would, in fact, be spent in the future. AND fans should use their wallets (through attendance, purchases, etc). to hold the franchise's feet to the fire. If not, EVERY Twins fan and EVERY Minnesota taxpayer should be OUTRAGED. Perhaps there aren't any good pitching deals that could be had but are those of you who are saying they shouldn't spend also saying that they are NO "purchases" they can use to improve this team? Are there NO Willingham-type deals to be made where you sign a player who may be valuable to you later in trades? It seems to me that there are a lot of places that this roster can be upgraded -- not just the pitching staff.

Is it punting if you were never on the field in the first place? As far as I'm concerned the Twins were pretty much stuck in the locker room the last 2 seasons. At least now it looks like TR may be interested in playing ball again.

I like it too -- and I think he could close if needed. Always nice to have a "spare".

This is the kind of trade I've been waiting to see from Terry Ryan -- glad to see he still has the contacts, skill and guts to make it happen. But I will miss Revere's grin. Please let some of the call-ups and additions bring some excitement because right not the Twins look like a very boring team.