Patronized-easily yet again- and an infusion of pejorative invective, all in one sentence of faux-dismissal, well played. Yet you "somehow" completely missed my point, even with the paint-by-number boldfaced dollar amounts that I provided. Moderator edit -- this is what happens when someone starts throwing around words like "patronizing and juvenile." You gentlemen are having a great debate that is illuminating and fun. Go after each other's ideas as aggressively as you wish, but please refrain from personal attacks that are irrelevant to what is otherwise a profound discussion. An "idealistic outcome", what exactly does that mean? In point of fact and directly contrary to your throw-away proposal, I "realistically" proposed 3 guys that the Twins "very realistically" could have obtained- with clearly better track records, predictable outcomes, durability and medical histories, and for only a slight premium to what they actually committed to (and yes, it is $14M guaranteed money that the Twins are obligated to pay). Finally, we both agree that the Twins have made a choice to be miserly over the next few seasons, but how can you say the Twins are "health-risk adverse", given that virtually every SP in the potential rotation has health questions that are yet to be answered, and of the FA pitchers, all but Correia have serious health concerns that make them more wild cards than players who can legitimately have their likely 2013 production parameters penciled in?