Shane Wahl

I guess I'll play along . . . with myself. On the other end, they sign Edwin Jackson and Shaun Marcum for 2-3 years each and 8-12 million each. Cost range: 2/32 -- 3/72. (this is the option I prefer most). On the other end they sign both Joe Saunders and Erik Bedard. Cost 1/10. (this is terrifyingly perhaps the most likely scenario)

Marcum has not been mediocre at all. While injured in 2009, he has posted sub 4.00 ERAs in 2008, 2010, 2011, and 2012. That's 550ish innings of sub 4.00 ERA. If the Twins aren't going to be willing to throw $30 over 3 years for someone like that, forget about trying to compete and especially forget about trying to win in the playoffs. Marcum has proven he can pitch in the AL East with an ERA+ well over 100. I'll take it. He hasn't been quite as good with Milwaukee (surprisingly) but I think he's still a decent pitcher. He has lost something on his fastball (down in the 87mph range now) so he's not my first choice but he wouldn't be a terrible signing by the Twins, I think. It's all relative, if the Twins can get him on a 2 year/18 mil deal its a good signing, but the minute you start competeing with a bunch of other teams to overpay him, its a bad signing plain and simple. The rotation is absolute dog **** no doubt, but the solution isn't to go out and over pay for a bunch of "solid #3 type guys" the solution is to trade some assets for some high upside guys who can be top of the rotation guys, and give 1-2 year deals to guys who's value is low, but have the potential to be high upside guys (see: SCOTT BAKER!!!!!!) I agree and I disagree. With Marcum, Peavy, Jackson, and Sanchez all offering similar expected performance/money/years this offseason, now is the time to sign a guy to a 3-4 year deal at $10-13m per. Chances are you won't be able to repeat that signing next year (or the following year) because the fewer of those guys there are on the market, the higher the price is driven. It's going to be awhile until we see this many league-average or slightly above league-average guys in the same offseason. It'd be a shame for the Twins to pass on picking up one of them. This team gave a 34 year old Pavano $8m a year over two years. They shouldn't balk at giving a guy aged 28-31 $11m a year over three or four years. I agree of course, though I think Sanchez might be a little more because of his age.

And you sir, should get kudos for a good post on this great article.

Wait for Aaron Hicks. Yeah. The thing is I think of Hicks as Span's replacement, so it would seem that a deadline deal might make sense.

I thought I posted this, but maybe not (I tend to type things for awhile and then think better of continuing various conversations . . . ). If Span is traded and Revere repeats this sub .675 OPS and is not worth it at the top of the order, what the hell is the plan?

Damn it, you gave me another reason to be pissed off about how poorly they handled him this year. Are we to expect similar things with Arcia, Hicks, and Herrmann now!?

Boston would be stupid not to re-sign him. If the Twins traded Willingham, Span, and Morneau, then a rational discussion about signing Cody Ross could take place.

Perhaps the point is that the most likely scenario involves Ervin Santana and Erik Bedard!

Why don't we locate the possible extremes of what they could do and then work towards a reasonable center . . . One extreme, they sign NO pitchers (except for going low-base on Baker) and instead chase down the MI route again . . . rolling out of ST with Diamond-Deduno-DeVries-Hendriks-Walters or Vasquez, and Baker, Gibson, and Hernandez are in AAA (or on the DL in Baker's case). On the other possible extreme they sign Edwin Jackson, Shaun Marcum, and let's say Ervin Santana for 2-3 years each and 8-12 million (low 2 years and $48 million, high 3 years $108 million). Back to the other extreme: Everything stays the same except they sign either a Joe Saunders or an Erik Bedard on a one-year, $5 million deal. Etc. Etc. Maybe this is more structured than just throwing out names.

Marcum has not been mediocre at all. While injured in 2009, he has posted sub 4.00 ERAs in 2008, 2010, 2011, and 2012. That's 550ish innings of sub 4.00 ERA. If the Twins aren't going to be willing to throw $30 over 3 years for someone like that, forget about trying to compete and especially forget about trying to win in the playoffs.

If the rotation is Diamond-Deduno-Hendriks at 3-4-5, then that is not bad. If they are 2-3-4, that is bad.

He's been worth the money this season. $13.5m isn't that much money for a guy that is posting a 116 ERA+. But I agree that there's a good chance whoever signs him deeply regrets it by 2016 (he should get at least four years, probably five this offseason). With top-shelf (or perceived top-shelf) pitchers, you overpay just to sign the guy. You sign him for an extra year or two as the player inevitably declines. Once you factor in that overpaying and extended length, you're easily looking at a guy who will be 50% more expensive over the short term and crippling over the longterm. I have zero issues with the Twins avoiding "elite" free agent pitching. It's just not a smart move for mid-market teams. On the other hand, I will be terribly disappointed if they don't sign a Jackson/Marcum/Sanchez type for three years. Those are the type of contracts that won't kill a mid-market team even if they fail. Sure, the upside is lower but if you're going to compete, you have to do it from the farm. Free agency has to be a complementary piece of the puzzle, not the main piece. My blueprint would be to trade Span for a high upside guy in the minors (probably low minors) to build for the long term. Then I'd sign a Jackson/Marcum type for three years. Then I'd sign Baker and cross my fingers. This rotation could compete in the Central if things break well for the Twins and it also gives them hope down the road: Jackson/Marcum/Sanchez Baker Diamond Scrub/Gibson later in the season Other scrub (Hendriks, probably) Sixth man: Deduno, De Vries, etc. Minors: Span for a low minors starter Berrios Wimmers (hope hope) Etc. Generally I like this, though I prefer trading Morneau at the moment. The market is thin for real number 1 pitchers, but is pretty deep for 2/3 guys (who would be number 1 pitchers for the Twins!). The most recent Gleeman and the Geek podcast cast doubts on Marcum and other than the injury, I don't see why . . . but they were talking getting Marcum on a one-year deal. I had him earlier in the year on a 4 year/$50 deal. Let's assume that both of these extremes are incorrect, and that a similar contract would work for Jackson (Sanchez is probably more like the 4/$50). So that's 3 years/$25 million or so. Not totally way beyond what they spent on Willingham, so that crowd of doubters can shut up. Signing Jackson or Marcum, AND signing a Joe Blanton or Ervin Santana? Probably not. Joe Saunders? Maybe for a Marquisesque contract. Anyway, another option for your trade scenario, of course, is for a major league pitcher. I have mentioned a few times that arbitration-eligible pitchers (and there are about a dozen of them worth considering) might be an option in a trade. But basically no one has ever replied to me about that so maybe I am crazy to think that teams trade younger pitchers like that? The list I made before, with FA year: Chris Sale, CHW 2017 Jarrod Parker, OAK, 2018 (?) Matt Harrison, TEX, 2015 Tommy Milone, OAK, 2018 Jason Hammel, BAL, 2014 Jeremy Hellickson, TB, 2017 Jordan Zimmermann, WAS, 2016 James McDonald, PIT, 2016 Wade Miley, WAS, 2018 Lance Lynn, STL, 2018 Vance Worley, PHI, 2018 Clayton Richard, SDG, 2015 The attractiveness here is that they all were good this year, and would be under control for awhile. Would a Span/Morneau, crazy bigfoot freak Swarzak (seriously?), and BJ Hermsen (I have big doubts about him, probably other teams do too, but whatever) be enough for one of these guys?

Just because I'm that guy...their difference in Picked Off + Caught Stealing is 1. Over 150 games. And in Span's favor. Boom. No one ever considers caught stealing!

Drew will be in his year of arbitration next year, right? I wonder how much of a raise from the minimum he will actually get? Anyway, Herrmann will probably save them a few hundred thousand.

Morneau and Carroll are the stronger hitters there and both should have pinch hit. I guess pinch running Casilla for Plouffe (dumb) limited the choice between Escobar and Florimon (and Gardy still made the wrong choice).

Chris just missed his first homer/hit. Escobar predictably can't do anything and Morneau pinch hits for Florimon. What? Now Carrol pinch runs for Morneau . . . what? Why not pinch it for Escobar?

They were going to have Herrmann bunt and NOT pinch hit for the weakest bat in baseball not named Butera?????

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/president/ This means perhaps a HUGE win for Obama. I will be curious to see Arizona numbers . . .

A key problem is that we are all so centered on the federal government and these national elections instead of focusing on local elections and local initiatives/movements that are always bound to be a more efficient use of resources. People are terribly disengaged from the world and that is the problem. I would move way more towards the libertarian point of view if we saw a big effort of participation by people in local government. But that doesn't happen. It's a shame because need for federal government diminishes with increased local participation in government (school board up).

I will be prickish to prevent you from leaving this thread . . . It amazes me that people would rather have lesser players play instead of guys who might mean 0.5 of a win. That 0.5 adds up when we are talking about the bottom four players on the roster. Butera is not a good player. He just isn't and it is hard to dispute that. He can work with pitchers, but maybe he should do that in the minors? The rest of your post, Oxtung, is pretty ridiculous. And it ends with a muddied thought about posters here thinking they know the absolute truth about things . . . I don't see that here. At least not since the disappearance of Fanatic Jack.

By the way, given that those top two are unreachable, I would love for the Twins to sign any two of the bottom four there. And if all can be had for 2 year contracts, that would be fantastic.

I am pretty confused by this and the G and G podcast. The latter seemed to indicate that pitchers would be available on one or two year contracts for under 10 million, and some WELL under that. There is no way that 20 million is thrown at more than a couple pitchers. And then I would expect a big drop. I guess I would ask for specifics: Greinke: A. Sanchez: Jackson: E. Santana: Marcum: Blanton: This provides a good range, in my view of the 20 mil vs. the 6-8 mil pitchers. There is no doubt that Boston and New York will try to buy big, but after that? The Angels are done spending, the Dodgers are done spending. Only a few other teams will make ONE big expenditure for somebody. The value in many of these guys drops a lot, though in the G and G podcast is seemed like it would drop in a HUGE way down to the 5 million range.

Really, Oxtung? The Souhan article about this is totally poor journalism in the first place. Ryan apparently said "elite" but who knows what he means by that?

Yikes, The Leviathan, you mentioned "you didn't build that." As though that hasn't been debunked again and again and again. Clearly, he did not say "you didn't build the business." The fact that you are swept away by such propaganda (in this case, the propaganda of selective editing) says a lot and it tells me that there is little point in trying to argue with you about any of this.