Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

mcrow

Provisional Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    283

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 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 mcrow

  1. mcrow
    Sad, but true.
  2. mcrow
    Oh... for God's sake. A guy like Marcum is a guy who had a mysterious arm injury last year that nobody apparently could figure out, only one offer was made to him and for $4m, a good but not great pitcher when healthy (Probably not as good as some people here think though), and a guy only here for a year. It would have been nice to give him a try but how can you be so upset they didn't give a guy who is probably coin flip on being healthy or not? I can go over this for the 5th time: He probably would have been better than signing Pelfrey or Corriea but if it were between him and Saunders I like Saunders better though it would have been good to have both.
  3. mcrow
    Oh come one now....lets stop with the dramatics. Marcum is a talented pitcher but has a serious health risk/question. It's not like this signing would have been so obviously good to begin with. I would like to see them take more chances but it's hard to cry over the loss of a guy like Marcum. Like you I'm PO'd that the owners are pocketing cash they said they'd spend but I wouldn't doubt either that they gave Ryan a budget for the season and they are darn close to the max of that money. So, I place the blame on the owners as well. I would rather have taken a chance on Marcum than Correia. I just don't see Correia being anything but a marginal #5 starter and we have a few younger guys that can be at least that. I may have been for Marcum over Pelfrey for similar reasons but both these signings are done already.
  4. mcrow
    Very best case is that Marcum and Pelfrey are both iffy.
  5. mcrow
    No, I think the Pohlads are bunch of money grubbers and I'm not happy they are holding on to something like $20M they said they'd spend on payroll. I'm 100% for the Harden signing, it was a minor league deal for almost nothing so there's no risk there really. Pelfrey I didn't like that much because I didn't think he was that good before TJ and this is his first year after TJ which is normally not at 100%. That's not about money. If he he was not in his first season post TJ then maybe you're getting a guy that's going to get you 200 innings. I think he's still more likely to pitch 180+ than Marcum though. Money for most of these players isn't that much an issue for me it's more about if they can play, how well, and how long.
  6. mcrow
    Actually, I think that Pelfrey has more chance to pitch a whole season than Marcum does and Pelfrey is already signed so it's not like we could change that.
  7. mcrow
    Well, you might be right to a point with Correia and DeVries. And like I said, I'm not really against signing Marcum all together but I understand why they wouldn't and don't disagree with it either. If they would have signed him some of the same people bellly-aching about not signing him would have complained about them signing him. Why? Because it's not clearly a good or bad move.
  8. mcrow
    That's the point. The most likely outcome here is that at some point in the season the Twins rotation will be in the same condition and they'll just be out $4m. If there was a decent chance that he plays the whole season I'd pay the guy $8M and be happy with taking that chance but not in this case where it's very likely he won't ptich the whole season.
  9. mcrow
    Talent isn't the question. More talent doesn't matter if you can't pitch. Better means overall impact on the team. He has the talent to be a #2 starter on most teams, but he might not be better than Correia or De Vries if he can't pitch or if he's pitching injured.
  10. mcrow
    Is Marcum really "better" though? Nobody can say they know that for sure with a straight face given his history. If there is an "if" qualifier that legit in front of why he can make the team better I don't see how anyone can really mad they didn't sign the guy. It's a roll of the dice with no skill factor involved and the vast majority of teams were not willing to take that gamble. I do think there is a problem with hop TR is representing where the team is at because he keeps sayin or hinting that he thinks they'll comepete which really feeds false hope for this season. IMO, you just go into the season pitching it as a rebuilding year and if you do better than that everyone is happy. You promise too much and don't deliver people get mad. TR words say one thing and actions say another which is frustrating.
  11. mcrow
    I right there with ya brother.
  12. mcrow
    I would have been behind signing Saunders and Marcum over Pelfrey and Correia without a doubt. That's proabably $12M VS $10M but Saunders is probably better than both Pelfrey and Correia and then you take a chance at Marcum. I really would have liked them to still sign Saunders anyway (I've changed my mind on that) but I still wouldn't be as upset about not getting Marcum. I could some up all of these moves by just saying none of them reall do much for me but some of them are done already.
  13. mcrow
    The Twins were 22 game out of a playoff spot last year. We need 4-5 more wins per pitcher in the rotation to be in contention so I'd say it's very unlikely they're that much better. I think they'll win more games this year but I still think 3 games is not going to be what put then in contention. Teams typically need between 87-90 wins to make the playoffs even with 2 WC. Right now I'd say the best the twins could do is 80 wins and that's assuming Morneau is playing well, Diamond doesn't regress, Pelfrey is 100%, Correia isn't a total waste of space, Worley has a career year, and there are no major injuries and the Middle Infield and CF are not total disasters. So even if you toss in a few more wins from Marcum and everything goes well for everyone on the team they come up 7-12 wins short. I still think they might win 70-75 games this year but much more than that is pushing it, IMO. It is possible that everything comes together and they make a run but I wouldn't bet on that.
  14. mcrow
    Like I said, I don't care for the Pelfrey signing but that one is done already. Marcum compounds the problem. Harden isn't a bad signing because it's minor league deal so if he looks good you keep him if not then don't and he might be useful in the BP. My Nolan Ryan comment wasn't saying one said anything like that. I'm highlighting a point which is that people here seem to think that Marcum, even if healthy would really make much difference to the team this year. IMO, he probably doesn't win many more games for the Twins over what they already have on the roster. Or at least not enough to justify signing him knowing he'll be gone next year one way or the other. I would have been OK with signing him for $4m/1 but don't see it really as big a difference as some here seem to think it would be. There just doesn't seem to be much value in brininging him in for a year at this point particularly if you're not sure about his health. Yes, Pelfrey wasn't the greatest signing but again we can't go back change Twins history now.
  15. mcrow
    Everyone is building every year but not everyone is rebuilding, there's a big difference. What is the upside of signing a guy that is likely to spend time on the DL and/or won't be here next year? Are they contending for a playoff spot this year and just need one more arm to make it? I think not. Where did I say anything about the money in this thread for Marcum? I said the money wasn't the issue, it's the injury risk and perhaps not the right philosophy. As I said, we need to see Gibson and Hendriks and perhaps De Vries and they are clearly not on the slow train to the majors. You already have two possible starters coming off of TJ so why toss in Marcum on top of that? There are times to gamble, like when you have a chance to be in the playoffs. There are times to gamble when rebuilding as well but the gambles are different. You sign injury prone vets for a non-contending team who isn't likely to affect wins and loss totals for the season much when it's unlikely he'll be here next year. The type of gambles you take at this stage is signing a guy that can help the team for years to come even if you over pay some. Wow! Sign Marcum. Now we win 3 more games this year! Well I'm glad we just missed out on the next coming of Nolan Ryan...lol.
  16. mcrow
    I want to see Gibson and Hendriks both get significant time as a starter. If Marcum was there along with the guys they already have we probably see a lot less of Gibson and Hendriks if Marcum stays healthy. Gibson likely to get ~140 innings or so that could be a 2/3 of a season, Hendriks gets the rest or gets fill in duty if a starter goes down. Cole De Vries is still around as well, wouldn't mind seeing him some either. We're just not going to agree on this, you'd sign a scrapheap player that was once a good player regardless of the situation where as I wouldn't. You just seem to see these types of players as being some sort savior or something. Realistically he's not likely to stay healthy and even if he did it's not like we're signing Verlander or something. He was a good starter when healthy, nothing more. His average WAR for a season is around 2.5 which barely makes him a top 30 starter. Diamond was a 2.2 last year. So you're adding a Scott Diamond with no upside to the roster, not signing a staff ace. Like I said, if they would have signed him I wouldn't have been mad because the price is good but I just don't think it makes much sense and I'm not sure it's the right idea for where the club is at right now. I'm not sure Marcum in the rotation really makes that much difference to the W/L record at season's end.
  17. mcrow
    I think if you're the Twins you have to either be all in and think you can contend or realize it's a rebuilding year. Seems to me that they don't know which way they think they're going yet which is part of the issue. If the team is rebuilding a guy like Marcum doesn't really make much sense. If you think you could compete them maybe the possible reward is worth it. IMO, the Twins are still a rebuilding team and they'd be better served seeing what some of the younger guys can do given they already picked up 3 vets for the rotation already. If they had not already signed Correia and/or Pelfrey then maybe it makes more sense to give Marcum a chance. I don't have a problem with the price really, $4M for a breathing pitcher is relatively cheap these days. It's more of a philosphical issue for me.
  18. mcrow
    One thing is for sure, if the Twins are going to be a contender at all (unlikely, IMO) they'll need the middle infield and rotation to over achieve. I think the OF will be OK, I think the corners of the infield will be at least cerviceable and Catcher is good. BP looks good, IMO. The rotation and middle infield look to be the ball and chain for this team.
  19. mcrow
    Well, you know the answer to that.......they have no intentions of spending $20m more. The way it looks they're going to have to spend clost to $40M between now and next season to make it to the 50% of revenue they talk about.
  20. mcrow
    I'm pretty predictable at this point: Brian Harper.
  21. mcrow
    Yes, middle infield is one of many areas this team needs to address. I do think they're worse of at those positions than in the rotation at this point. Would have been nice to add MLB caliber infielder to the mix as of right now we're likely to have AAA level player out there at one position. I like Carroll but he is 39 and maybe would be a great bench guy but he's now forced into a role where the Twins are counting on him to produce above expectations.
  22. mcrow
    TJ is done, will have nearly a full year behind him on that front going into the opener. He might not be 100% back but the risk of injury isn't all that much more than it was before he got injured. I agree on Harden, low risk and high reward pick up there. You're in no way counting on him giving the team anything. If you sign Marcum you're counting on him to produce.
  23. mcrow
    I don't think 28 other teams passed on Pelfrey, there were around 7 teams with serious interest in him where as most of the teams mentioned for Marcum were more than likely just inquiries which don't mean they were all that serious about signing him. Not to mention Pelfrey's situation is a more of known, he's coming off of TJ and we basically know how pitchers coming off TJ work. Correia reportedly left money on the table which indicates he had more than one offer and he's not really an injury risk at this point. I think the whole issue with Marcum is a history of injury and the last one is so strange that you don't know for sure it's not going to happen again and I'm not taking a player's word on that. The combo of Marcum having almost zero buzz about being signed and his mystery injury makes him a lot more risky than taking a guy coming off of TJ.
  24. mcrow
    I think that it's very likely that the Twins starters put up a 5-6 WAR this year if everyone is healthy. Big problem is that we have no idea how Pelfrey is going to do, Hendriks gives us no reason to think he's capable of giving a positive WAR. Correia could possibly be worse than a 0. However, I think Worely very well could be in the 2+ WAR range this year. So depending on what Diamond does I think they get most of the way to 5 with just Worley and Diamond so if they get anything out of the other 3 they could easily make 5-6. Still that's probably about half the WAR of the average rotation in the majors.
  25. mcrow
    NO. As I've said I don't like the Correia deal but the market this year makes it look better than it would have been last year. Not to mention what the market will be next year with all the money coming in. I'm not totally against picking up Marcum but when you already took chances on Pelfrey and Harden and you don't really have any workhorse types on the roster I think adding another risky guy isn't a good idea. I think if you had a Saunders or Radke clone on the roster already maybe you take a more serious look at Marcum. Right now you have 3 starters in the rotation that you can't be sure what you're going to get out of them. I think we know what we're getting with Worley (He might really be the hands down best pitcher on the staff by season's end) and we know what Correia is and it's not impressive. Diamond is basically coming into year 2 as a full time starter and there is reason to believe he will regress. Pelfrey coming off of TJ. Whoever ends up in the 5th spot at this point is obviously a question mark. All I'm saying is given all of the uncertaintity in the rotation why add another huge question mark? Particularly given the chances that he's with the Twins for more than a year are next to none.
×
×
  • Create New...