TheLeviathan
-
Posts
21,580 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
49
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 TheLeviathan
-
How was that the point? You tried to argue Sanchez was inferior and actually managed to show how significantly superior he is to all the options you listed. Again it appears the "Must...defend....payroll...no....matter...ridiculousness..." crowd ignores basic realities of baseball. Good FA pitching NEVER out-supplies demand. Never. It's an utterly ridiculous implication on your part. You are going to have to pay "more than he's worth" for any of those guys you named. All of which, in case you forgot, are worse than the guy you didn't want us to sign.
-
Game Thread: Twins vs White Sox, 7:10pm
TheLeviathan replied to Brock Beauchamp's topic in Archived Game Threads
Right down the middle = "Not a bad pitch" Oof. -
-
Just saw Vikes new stadium..... Oh my
TheLeviathan replied to Brodin4Calder's topic in Minnesota Vikings Talk
Also....how creative can football stadiums really look at the end of the day? Most are all the same in appearance from the outside. The ones that try too hard usually look ugly as sin. -
Are you clear on what you've been saying "the whole time"? I'm not, I won't claim otherwise. It's hard since it's shifted so many times I lost track of whatever point you may have thought you had.
-
Well, yeah, being one of the 5 worst starts for a player's career in MLB history gives you a lot of room for growth. Gotta keep things in perspective when you throw stuff like that around. I hope tonight was the start of a really solid career for him. If these first two months, where everyone was worried about team control, are the launching pad for a great career. Screw the extra year of service, this investment will be more than worth it.
-
So...about that pitch to contact philosophy
TheLeviathan replied to whydidnt's topic in Minnesota Twins Talk
My market inefficiency quote was 630% snark. Give or take. -
"At best"? That seems like a bit of a stretch. Sanchez is a lower class 2/high end 3. Which would all but make him our ace. But you did actually compare Sanchez to the group you later posted right? Nolasco is a career 93+ ERA in a dominant pitchers park, Johnson can't stay healthy, Volquez is career 89+ ERA, and Ervin Santana is 98+. So you're after inferior pitchers on the assumption they will be cheaper. I'd like to suggest that that particular premise is dubious at best.
-
Um, we're in discussions about payroll. That is largely going to center around, well, payroll. Why is that surprising? That's not being "obsessed", it's being "on topic" As cmat and I discussed in the other thread - a strong farm is essential to the team's future. But there are really only three viable ways to add talent (especially elite talent): Draft it, trade for it, or sign it in free agency. You are basically advocating for the outright dismissal of 1/3 of those options. Personally, I don't like closing off ways to make the team better, even if sometimes that pill is bitter to swallow. St. Louis and Atlanta (similar markets with a farm-first mentality) DO use dollars in FA and in being willing to hand out hefty extensions to guys they trade for. They don't balk at that. And it has paid major dividends for them both in terms of their team's talent levels. I'm not obsessed with the payroll, but I'm obsessed with the idea that they shouldn't dismiss it as a tool to make the team better. Most all of your argument suggest exactly that. (Well, the ones that don't contradict the other ones.)
-
I think they should have pursued Sanchez. I also listed a ton of other options on another thread that could have been 2 or 3 year deals as well. Ultimately they may have failed to sign those guys. But I also seriously doubt they tried. And....before you even post it, straight from the mouth of the front office....."dollars and years" that's how you close deals.
-
Those are all fine points, it can certainly be a timing issue. The problem is that it just feels convenient. Not your point specifically, but that meme for the organization. I feel like there will always be new one cloaked in some faux scheme of logic just waiting in a neat package to take the team off the hook again for being cheap.
-
So you'd rather absorb all the risk at the time it would project to most hurt the team's budget? Does....not....compute. No matter what new way you spin it. I'm done, it's clear you have no idea what you actually think, no point debating someone who hasn't even rectified their own premises for consistency and basic logic.
-
This may be a winning strategy to get gay marriage passed around the nation.
-
Well, or I could go over the top hitting FAs of the last 5-7 years and show you how much of a crapshoot they are in the last few years of their deals too. Risk comes with signing large FA contracts. Which is required to add elite talent. If you're not ok with doing that - just say it. Quit flailing away in every post to come up with a new excuse to say you are ok with it. It's inconsistent and almost constantly fallacious.
-
If this is the Hicks we can all look forward too....then damn. I mean....Damn. He put a charge into that ball.
-
I guess that depends on where you slot their time tables. I don't think I'd have wanted both Grienke and Sanchez, but one of them would've made me feel a lot better about the present and future. Not just in terms of talent, but willingness to acquire. I think that's the part that worries me more than the current efforts, it's the hopelessness about future efforts.
-
As opposed to what Prince Fielder, Albert Pujols, or Josh Hamilton will look like at the end of their careers? Let's face it, if you're going to dabble in FA - it's not going to be pretty. There are no coupons. There are no buy-one, get-one-free aces or MVPs out there. A lot of people trying to have their cake and eat it too in here. ("Well of course I don't want them to do nothing! I just don't want them to do the only thing that happens in reality and not in Imaginary FA Contract Land")
-
It's amazing how much you can motivate people just by being bitter, indignant a-holes.
-
When you have elaborated specifics and quantified "risk" for each individual player and share your formula for doing so, I'd be happy to hear why your viewpoint is superior. I did that with revenue, after four or five times I feel like you grasped the elementary math at root in that...correct?
-
The Twins have stated in the past that they use 50% of total revenue as a guide for payroll. Since we can also use reputable sources like Forbes (all of this has been said already BTW) we can slot their 50% number as somewhere between 100-130M. We're currently at the 70ish mark. So that other 60M that is normally earmarked for player salaries is indeed going "unused" to help the talent on the field. Well, considering some of the key pieces are on a faster track than most thought and some of that young group is already debuting, I don't think we're in a full rebuild. We're trying to build around Mauer. It's not like we're a team of 35 year olds with no upside here. So yeah, part of our future is playing now...why not supplement them? My problem is primarily that if you are 40-50M under your expected payroll, with glaring needs that will not block any young players, and a FA group that fit some of those needs.....and you do nothing.....how am I supposed to believe that trend changes. Book it right now, in 3 years when most of these same people making the arguments you are see that Brett Anderson (healthy and pitching like an ace) is on the FA market and the Twins do nothing, you'll all scoff and say "Well...yeah, we can't sign anyone to a big deal NOW. That would interfere with locking up Sano and Buxton!" And we'll all ride this craptacular train of circular nonsense one more time.
-
This seems highly inconsistent after just calling someone ridiculous for thinking the idea of signing Grienke should be entertained. I'm not sure if you are in the drjim camp of not understanding inflation and new revenue streams....but the deals ain't gonna get any easier to swallow.
-
Um....I just want a better baseball team, what's so wrong about that? also, this is circular. Anything short of fallacious nonsense just can't defend a premise like "I don't want unused revenues to make my team better consarnit!" with a straight face.
-
How often does elite talent hit the market? In two years...would you sign, say, a Prince Fielder to his deal? Or Pujols? Is this just anti-Grienke?
-
Unless you have bilateral leg weakness....or whatever the hell that was. I get the sense that pitchers are injured more, but catchers struggle with long term durability at the position as well. Point is...if you're afraid of the Grienke deal, you should be afraid of most any deal that it takes to retain and add elite talent. That would worry me if I was a fan.
-
Then you're talking about how you prioritize your money, not about risk. I wouldn't disagree, but it's a different point. Not to mention, one could argue that we signed Mauer to that contract with at least a strong chance that he may not end up continuing to play that premium position as well. As for that last part I completely agree. The Twins had no choice but to sign Mauer, I'm more talking about these deals in a vacuum. Anyone who suggests that there is miles of difference in risk or value - they're fooling themselves. Large FA contracts almost always share the same risks. Some may be riskier than others, but most all of them carry serious risk.
