drjim

Payroll!

I guess I'm just not that obsessed with payroll. There are other considerations, which I have tried to explain and I would argue factor more into the Twins decision making, but for some reason it is always about payroll and always gets deflected back to that. It is indeed pointless to debate if that is the only thing you consider no matter what. I concede they have the room for a signing like that bases upon current payroll and revenue streams but I don't concede the specific players available last offseason would have been good signings because of risk factors primarily as well as other considerations.

Doesn't necessarily go up. One of the inherent risks of prep pitchers.

How much clearer do I have to say exactly that. Over the next two years the risk for a contract like this is excessive. Especially for the actual pitchers that were available and the actual contracts it would take to sign them. Your comprehension issues aside this has basically been my point the whole time.

I think this type of statement is a severely flawed premise at best and irresponsible at worst. There is nothing to suggest that contracts being equal Sanchez would choose the Twins over the Tigers or that Greinke would choose the Twins over the Dodgers, or that the Dodgers would not be willing to up their offer if they had to. They are already dicey contracts as is and the Twins would have to make that much riskier in order to actually bring them in.

It gets to the point where if you don't want to hear something you won't.

I'm quite confident I understand salary inflation and new revenues. Not as confident you have as much grasp on risk outcomes since every time it is mentioned you deflect it back to salary and the space the Twins have.

I saw your list. I still don't think anyone on it other Greinke should be considered an ace (and I think he is more of a 2) with Sanchez as more of a 2-3 type and Dempster a rung below. Everyone else on your list is more or less in the category of Correia and Pelfrey, maybe a win better. The Twins could have (and probably should have) signed another pitcher in that group or signed someone instead of Correia and/or Pelfrey, but I thought we were debating signing aces. I'm glad you concede this point. Many others will not.

I suppose it inevitably gets to the point where you replace my actual points with your own twisted rendition of them and top it off with excessive hyperbole. Good debate though, it helped me to clarify my own thinking on the subject.

I always thought the main complaint was that the Twins didn't sign better pitchers this offseason. Wasn't that the whole point of this thread? I think looking at the actual pitchers that were available and what the costs/risks of that signing would be instructive. To speculate on hypothetical injuries that could happen to actual pitchers and how that enters into a risk equation seems a more worthwhile exercise than criticizing the Twins for not signing hypothetical pitchers that don't actually exist. I will concede the point that signing Greinke this past offseason would not impact the ability to lock up the core down the line. That was never my primary point. When you talk about "shifting goalposts" or the like I think it might be good for you to acknowledge that there is not just one reason why the Twins didn't sign Greinke. There were multiple conversations/debates going on in this thread at the same time, I can see how that would get confusing for you. I will also personally concede that throughout this specific thread/debate my thoughts have evolved as people have raised objections and helped me to flesh out my argument and I have done more in-depth research and thinking on the topic. I would think that is purpose of discussion and debate. If you have a simple, black and white, unchanging position on every issue, what would be the point of coming on to a message board?

This is fun. I'm actually responding to the real decisions/players that were in front of the team, not a hypothetical signing of a hypothetical player/contract that doesn't actually exist. I would fully expect the Twins to greatly expand their payroll when they are competitive and in a position to lock up elite pieces of their core so I am not especially worried about the payroll point that you made. I prefer to take the risk of a longer contract for a pitcher when that risk can be rewarded with a shot at a world series run. I don't see that happening in the next two years so I don't see the point of taking that risk on right now. I would rather take on the risk when there is a chance for reward. This is a very minor point to our bigger discussion. I wouldn't argue that the Twins will have a low payroll the next couple of seasons, and I would even concede they could fit another $25 million dollar player the next 6 seasons. My bigger point was always that they probably have one shot to add a player like this and I would not have done it this past offseason because of the actual options that were there and the risk reasons that have been discussed. I don't think they could do 4-5 like suggested before. I believe the payroll will be lower next year than this year, but will start to increase a little after that. Guys like Blackburn, Morneau (if not extended), Willingham, etc. are coming off, but there will be bumps from arby and I think the Twins will sign a couple of the $5-10 mil free agent types in the next couple of years as well will make up for that.

Trades give you access to much better pitchers than are available on the free agent market. The lower contract is just a bonus. I would hope they would get someone better than those three. Dickey seemed a little flukeish, Johnson is injury prone (and shockingly hurt again), and Buehrle might be cooked and certainly doesn't belong in the AL East.

It is probably more accurate to say I would not have specifically paid Greinke and Sanchez last offseason the contracts it would have taken to get them. I could have go for the Dempster contract but I read that he was more interested in going to Boston than Minnesota (and I don't really blame him). I saw the rest of the market as more or less the same. The Twins signed Pelfrey and Correia. I preferred McCarthy and Marcum myself, and as of now the Twins did better than my suggestion. Not really. My more pertinent argument would be that if you blow your wad on Greinke or Sanchez last offseason it would limit your opportunity to sign a pitcher in 2-3 years when the current minor league core is starting to establish itself in the majors. The point about arby players is that their pay will make up for (and perhaps surpass) the money that is coming off the books via other players, so the payroll, with no additional signings, will look similar to what it has been this year. The team will still have the $20-30 million gap it has (perhaps more if the future revenues come in), but if that was invested in Greinke it would not be available for another starting pitcher. The true risk in this comes from the fact that Greinke could get hurt or start to regress. You will almost certainly get good years at the start of the contract and while a few more wins this year this season would be nice, it won't make the Twins a world series contender. If he is hurt or starts to regress in 2-4 years, that is exactly the timeframe you would want your big (hypothetical) free agent signing at his best to coincide with the rise of the new core. If a pitcher was acquired via trade I would support an extension. I have always advocated extending guys on the roster. I have said this years crop is "weak" and "thin". I don't remember ever making judgements on the quality of future free agent classes. I have no idea what they will end up being like after extensions and whatnot. As such, I have definitely not repeatedly said that this year's FA group is inferior to future ones. It is possible that future FA crops are also weak or thin or even worse. I appreciate the debate.

The Twins signed two guys in that bunch. I would say after Greinke, Sanchez and Dempster it was pretty much a crapshoot. That is what I gather from reviewing the stats of the other guys. At the end of the year some in that group will have done better, some worse, and most about the same. I totally want the Twins to field the best team, just like every fan wants their team to field the best team. When the demand of starting pitching outweighs the supply you don't always end up with the best options.

Small point but Upton was promoted agressively by a different regime than the one currently in charge. It was probably fun to see him in the majors that young but it took 4 years for him to stay up for good, that probably isn't an ideal development track.

I don't know what pitchers will be available so I don't want to speculate on that. By "depth" I mean guys like Rosario, May, possibly Kepler or Michael type. They have value and could potentially fetch quality pitchers.

The majority of improvement will have to come from within. The trade will not be Buxton Sano or Arcia but some of the other depth in the system. I never have thought Sanchez or Greinke were realistic options for a variety of reasons that have been discussed many times. I'm not necessarily opposed to all spending, just the actual contracts that would have had to been issued last offseason.

I can get behind this. A couple of points I also would personally add: 1. The free agent pitching class was weak. 2. The Twins cannot outbid the Dodgers. 3. Terry Ryan is conservative and frugal, not cheap. He will spend money but not for these prices for this talent. 4. The real spending will come from in-house extensions. 5. Payroll will be low for a couple more years as Ryan turns over the roster and works in young talent.

So you assume people don't understand statistics quite like you. Interesting. And I don't particularly care what the payroll ends up at. I care about moves made and results. That is what drives how much money I spend on the team and how much time I take tracking results.

My best guess is they will sign no one but a trade strikes me as likely. There will be very few above average starters on the market the next two years.

Or they analyze the actual market of real actual players with other teams competing for said players services. They then think of realistic outcomes instead of raging about hypothetical situations involving hypothetical players.

I'll ask my most basic question again. Do you honestly believe the Twins could outbid the Dodgers?

So you don't necessarily advocate spending on the actual free agents that existed last offseason but instead spend on hypothetical players that don't actually exist. I don't see what could possibly go wrong with that plan.

So the Twins are going to be able to outbid the Dodgers? Interesting theory.

I'm not sure anyone disputes that you could fit his salary into the payroll structure going forward, more that it would eliminate the possibility of a similar signing in the future. The more relevant questions are: A. Would he actually want to sign here? Doubtful, as he basically forced the hand of Kansas City when there were suffering through similar futility as the Twins have the past two year. The promise of great prospects coming up did nothing to change his mind. B. Would the Dodgers not match whatever top offer the Twin made? Doubtful as well, as they seem to have no limit to the amount of money they are willing to spend. Do you honestly believe the Twins would outbid the Dodgers, much less the Angels, Rangers, and other teams that were bidding? That is not realistic with the current revenue streams of the Twins compared to those franchises.