gocgo

Agree. We have options...the Angels have issues. What do you do when the guy that you hung your franchise on isn't all that he was advertised to be? Glad we avoided that train wreck.

This is going to be interesting to see what corresponding moves are made. Sanchez is definitely gone unless he accepts a minor league deal and he won't. Hughes could potentially end up in the bullpen, but then what happens to Gibson? Are there options left? or do we break camp with him in a 5 man rotation and then figure out something when Santana comes back...I guess I'd prefer to have him as an option in case someone gets hurt and the good Gibson shows up. Dunno, but it sure is fun to be a Twins fan lately.

I used to think that the NFL had it right with the salary cap, but there is an issue with it that I think needs to be addressed and that is that states without a state income tax have a negotiating advantage over high tax states like NY. Now it wouldn't break my heart at all to see the Yankees get screwed over because for a lot of years they have held an advantage over smaller market teams. I would like to see a salary cap put in for MLB, but there are issues with that even if you put in an adjustment for high tax states. For example, the Yankees have the YES network that brings in a pile of cash and furthers their brand. The players want a piece of that pie. They don't want to be held under the restrictions of a salary cap while the owners rake in a kings ransom from the TV revenue. Has the luxury tax evened the playing field? IMO, not really. Teams that are willing to pay the tax are the same teams that can afford to pay the tax. It's not so much a penalty as just a cost of doing business and that business is putting a winner on the field. Putting in a salary floor might help, but what about the teams like Miami or TB that might have a legitimate star on their team, but still lose and don't draw the fans? I don't have any answers, but I do know that baseball has an issue with non-competitive teams...and a lot of them! Winning draws fans but it also draws players. The best players want to compete for a championship. Jake Arrietta wants to win and compete for a championship. There are a ton of teams that could offer him what he's asking, and he would probably still say no. Does the MLB draft even the playing field?...not the way the NBA and NFL drafts do. Those players are ready to contribute right away or much sooner than the average MLB player. Vary rarely does it happen in MLB where a player is drafted and ready to compete at the highest level from day 1.

I don't think the Twins feel that they really need to add either one. I don't see the log jam breaking until a SP has an injury and then I would see them doing a 1 year deal at this point with the hopes that FA next year is better for them. I think the Twins feel that they have options in the minors if there is an injury and either one of these guys is a luxury and not a necessity.

Leaning toward Rock...just Rock...no first name, no last name, kinda like Cher, Madonna....just Rock.

Sorry...I gotta go with the obvious on this one - Stink.

Agree, but I think people are focusing on the offensive side of the ball regarding both Mauer and Dozier - perhaps because those are easier to quantify. However, as I look at how the team is being assembled, defense seems to be the focus and from that perspective, Mauer is either the best or one of the top defensive first basemen in the league while Dozier is decent (I know, I know...he won a gold glove) but not irreplaceable from a defensive aspect. One could argue that Polanco at second with one of our up and coming SS taking his place may be an upgrade on defense. Replacing Mauer at 1B would be a defensive downgrade with anyone in our system and possibly anyone in the majors. Anyway, what I'm saying is that, right or wrong, the FO seems to be focused on defense first.

If you don't have an ace, then you need your 2,3,4 to be better than the other teams 2,3,4. So, in that case, you could consider moving your 4 to pitch against their ace and then have your 1,2,3 against their 2,3,4....in theory. The problem is that with off days, you can and will face their ace 3 times. I think one of the issues with the World Series is that it really doesn't mimic the series of the regular season due to television scheduling and travel considerations. You might have the best team in the regular season, but if you aren't set up for the playoffs with an ace, you don't get crowned the champs. If MLB wanted to truly crown the best team in baseball, the World Series would be set up to play 7 games in 7 (maybe 8) days, thus taking away pitching the ace 3 times by utilizing only 3 days rest. That's just my two cents. It's bothered me for some time. I feel better now with that off my chest.

I think he makes the team as the 5th starter or a long reliever. I've said that I don't think they need a 5th starter when they break camp. They will need one twice in April due to days off. They may need fewer if there are rain outs. Remember Terry Mulholland? Dude had rubber in the arm and not much left in the tank, but he was the crafty veteran out of the pen that we would put out there when the game was out of hand and we needed innings. That could be Hughes roll.

When I look at what Grossman brings to the club, he certainly takes quality at bats and offers a bit of pop. He's probably not ideal for a pinch runner, can only play the corner OF spots and is a bit of a liability when he is in one of those spots. When I look at what Granite brings to the club, he also takes quality at bats but doesn' offer much pop. He is a good option for a pinch runner and can play all 3 OF positions without much of a drop off if any. He is also a cheaper option than Grossman. If the Twins are intent on keeping both, the job is Grossman's, but I don't know why we would be intent on keeping both given that Wade is close. Grossman has over achieved in my mind and hats off to him, but I just don't see a spot for him if your intent is to break with the strongest and most flexible team. If they are going to cut Grossman lose, the right thing is to cut him early and give him a chance to catch on with another team.

After this past offseason, I'm not sure I'd be that excited about hitting the free agency market. Teams are waiting it out and bargain shopping.

To me, Robbie G will have a tough time fitting in on any team. He does a lot of little things right. Has quality at bats, etc. The problem is that he's a liability in the field compared to the other guys we have to roam the outfield. At the same time, he's not a bat to bring off the bench when looking for some pop...like a typical DH or pinch hitter. So, given that you have Esco to fill that role of pinch hitter with decent wheels, Granite to fill the 4th OF role and pinch run, etc... the only shot that I see for Robbie G depends on Sano's possible suspension. If Sano gets suspended, Esco moves to 3rd and Robbie may find a roster spot. Should be interesting. Remember the days when we went into spring training with a lot of IF's? IF this guy can come back from injury, IF this guy can build on last season, IF this guy can figure out big league pitching, etc...not a ton of IF's this year and that's really nice. I sense an air of confidence with this team.

ERA...I think it is the single most misleading stat in the majors. It depends almost entirely on the quality of the defense behind the pitcher. If that center fielder is a half step slower than the league average, the base hits fall in rather than being caught for outs. If the short stop lacks range but has a sure glove, ERA will suffer. If the 2nd baseman doesn't turn the double play quite quick enough, the pitcher is pitching to another batter rather than walking back to the dugout. The pitcher can only control so much. If the ball gets hit out of the park, it's on the pitcher. If the batter K's, it's mostly pitcher, but some catcher too. Walks are mostly on the pitcher. Anything else relies on the guys behind him.

Sweet mother of all that is good.

If you are aiming for long term and sustainable, who thinks that signing Darvish to a 6 year contract is wise? If you are looking at numbers, you know that signing a 31 year old pitcher with miles on his arm and body isn't really a 6 year deal...it's about a 2 year deal before the wheels start to wobble and eventually fall off. Yes, there are exceptions and we have one on the team right now with Erv, but that is the exception. Can you afford to absorb that contract for 4 more years if your goal is to have long term sustainable success? Plenty of people have criticized Mauer's contract saying that it hamstrung the Twins by being unable paying top dollar for pitching. If Darvish can't pitch until he's 37...36...35...how is that different? I can tell you that the odds are not good for Darvish to be an effective starter for 6 years. Actually, the odds are not good for Darvish to be an effective starter for half of that.

I really like Archer...that said, I'm not wild about trading for him. Simply put, if I'm TB and I have a really good pitcher on a really friendly contract, what is my incentive to trade him? Well, to improve the team for the future of course. How do you do that? You get more than you give up. TB is going to ask an awful lot. Reports are that they would have to be "blown away" by an offer to trade him. So, if you're the team that blows them away, you've given them more than what they are giving up. You know. Kinda like Matt Garza, Jason Bartlett, Eduardo Morlan for Delmon Young, Brendan Harris, and Jason Pridie.

Yeah, I totally agree on not pushing them early which is another reason that I think they will have the additional BP spot to get an extra inning here and there and maybe limiting the starters pitch count to even less than 100.

I was thinking that the #2 starter would get shortened rest that 2nd time thru, but I may have counted wrong. He'd pitch on the 7th, have the 8th, 9th, 10th to recover while the 3, 4, and 1 pitch, so I think we would need that 5th starter on the 11th.

I think starters like to be in the rhythm of starting every 5 days early on. As the season grinds on, that extra day can give them a needed break or even skip a turn in the rotation if necessary. I'll stick with the prediction that we break with 4 starters and an extra body in the bullpen as we don't tend to stretch out starters early. I think they only need a 5th starter on the 11th and the 24th. They can do that by sending down the extra bullpen body or by putting someone on the 15 day DL and bringing up a starter for that period starting on the 11th. Of course all this assumes (dangerously) that Erv will be ready in early May.

I just don't see Hughes in the rotation to start the season...bullpen maybe. There are only 2 games in April where we need a 5th starter, so I see us breaking camp with 4 starters and a heavy bullpen. When the time comes for a 5th starter, they can fill in by bringing up a AAA guy like Slegers to give them a start and swap out a bull pen guy that has options (heavy bullpen becomes normal size). I think they can piece things together with a 4 man rotation and fill ins until Erv is back. I do think they will add a starter via FA to go with the 3 locks though.

When I look back on baseball, I think this all kind of got out of control when Arod was offered $252 million for 10 years. That led to more guys juicing which led to higher salaries. They were willing to take the risk to their bodies for the big payday. The amazing thing is that Arod is still getting paid from that contract thru 2025 due to to some financial twists involving the Rangers bankruptcy. Talk about a stupid contract! That piece of the pie got a lot bigger when that contract was signed. Now, players still want that big piece of the pie even when the numbers don't justify it. Unfortunately, those big contracts got paid for by us. I'd love to see it back off (contracts, ticket prices, food prices), but I don't see that happening.

No. Their title was long before their "All In" year. All in was 2011. WS was 2005.

Yikes! I saw the words "all in" and couldn't help but think back to how well that worked out for the pale hose south siders. I don't know that they have recovered from that move.

"With the current players available, I'd hold on RH bats and wait an see how things are going, particularly with Vargas, Grossman, Byungho Park, Garver, closer to the trade deadline." I think Park is gone like the dodo bird.

MLB.com wrote: "Littell's pitchability may be more impressive than his stuff. He can't overpower hitters, but he mixes his pitches, pounds the strike zone and keeps the ball down, generating plenty of strikeouts and groundouts. He has a ceiling of a No. 4 starter, perhaps more if he can add more power to his pitches." This is kind of funny, especially when you read the other people on the list and read how many of them have great stuff, but can't find the strike zone. The only thing they missed was "In summary, he pitches like that bum Greg Maddux."