Article: Twins Punting 2013? Not So Fast

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by birdwatcher

mww, it's also realistic for me to buy a new Mercedes and enter it into a demolition derby. Not gonna do it. Guess I'm just cheap, right?



You're not wrong for wanting Marcum, Sanchez, or whomever at their asking price. That doesn't make you greedy. But refusing to do that doesn't make the Twins cheap either.

---

Birdwatcher's "cheap-cheap" sliding scale of expectations

Gunnarthor's followup quote:

"Yeah, I think he gets at least 5 years and over 15m per. His agent called a 4/48 offer insulting. Still, I'd be willing to offer him 5/70 and hope that's enough. Also like to see Marcum come here."


Gunnarthor said it best, I believe this was the scenario you were suggesting was what Ryan was seeking, and you would hold him to this. This is the scenario that would have me doing handstands and cartwheels and singing TR praises.

This aint gonna happen.

This wasn't gonna happen once Span was moved. This is why you are now apparently in agreement with Ryan, ie calling a .500 record, "contending".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheLeviathan

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shane Wahl

The 2013 team is already a bit better with Worley than Revere anyway.

---

And Span?

---

Well no, of course, but the next move after trading away Span was not one that furthered the punting at all.

Giving up would mean trading Revere for prospects only. It would also involve trading Morneau for prospects.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheLeviathan

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by diehardtwinsfan

I agree with your first point, though I think there are 5 guys who have a shot of cracking the .800 mark. Mauer, Morneau, and Willingham should do it relatively easily. Parmalee and Plouffe are question marks, but it is hardly a given that these guys will stink...

---

Achieving .800+ is hardly the bar for stink or not-stink.

---

No, it tends to be the bar for pretty decent hitters. I'm not sure what to think about their chances in 2013 right now unless they go still go out and get some guys, but the offense isn't going to be terrible (sans injuries of course).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jokin

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by birdwatcher

mww, it's also realistic for me to buy a new Mercedes and enter it into a demolition derby. Not gonna do it. Guess I'm just cheap, right?



You're not wrong for wanting Marcum, Sanchez, or whomever at their asking price. That doesn't make you greedy. But refusing to do that doesn't make the Twins cheap either.

---

Birdwatcher's "cheap-cheap" sliding scale of expectations

Gunnarthor's followup quote:

"Yeah, I think he gets at least 5 years and over 15m per. His agent called a 4/48 offer insulting. Still, I'd be willing to offer him 5/70 and hope that's enough. Also like to see Marcum come here."





Gunnarthor said it best, I believe this was the scenario you were suggesting was what Ryan was seeking, and you would hold him to this. This is the scenario that would have me doing handstands and cartwheels and singing TR praises.

This aint gonna happen.

This wasn't gonna happen once Span was moved. This is why you are now apparently in agreement with Ryan, ie calling a .500 record, "contending".

---

Sanchez isn't signing here--any offer MN makes, gets shopped. At a certain the ability to play on a winning team supercedes a slight increment in salary. Discussion of the top tier of FA is pointless.
.500 ball isn't contending, but it represents a huge improvement. Contending? For another 1st round elimination? Been there done that. There has to be several marqee players to make a playoff run feasible--and the Twins don't have them yet!
But sound drafts and there can be a team that can contend for a World Series, not another ALC Division blah. .500 ball after two seasons of ~.400 ball and signing free agents starts to look feasible.:go:

I just looked at the 40-man roster. Where's Sam Deduno?

Is it punting if you were never on the field in the first place?

As far as I'm concerned the Twins were pretty much stuck in the locker room the last 2 seasons.

At least now it looks like TR may be interested in playing ball again.

I don't see the Twins as punting and believe that they can make strong strides to respectability in 2013. The Brewers got rid of Grienke when they were playing so poorly for most of the season and then made a mad push for the playoffs when they brought up young pitching prospects and infield prospects for remainder of the year. There is something to say about new blood and nothing to lose mentality. Watch for Twins in 2nd half of 2013 and beyond. The Tool players are arriving soon.

Let me pose this question: how many games will it take to win the AL Central in 2013?

In 2012, Detroit won it with 88, 3 games better than Chicago. Nobody else had more than 72.

I think we're looking at a win total in the high 80's again - tops. If the Tigers stumble, it could be mid-80's. I don't see dramatic improvement from any of the other teams, the Whities will probably take a step back.

Could the Twins achieve 85-89 wins? Not likely, but I don't think it's beyond the realm of possibility either. If the Twins were in the AL West or East, forget it. But remaining competitive in this field is within reach, and quite achievable if some things break the Twins way.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by one_eyed_jack

Let me pose this question: how many games will it take to win the AL Central in 2013?

In 2012, Detroit won it with 88, 3 games better than Chicago. Nobody else had more than 72.

I think we're looking at a win total in the high 80's again - tops. If the Tigers stumble, it could be mid-80's. I don't see dramatic improvement from any of the other teams, the Whities will probably take a step back.

Could the Twins achieve 85-89 wins? Not likely, but I don't think it's beyond the realm of possibility either. If the Twins were in the AL West or East, forget it. But remaining competitive in this field is within reach, and quite achievable if some things break the Twins way.

---

Lets say its 88 games like last year... The Twins won 66 last year. Just 16 more wins and you are 82-80 and that puts you in contention. If you are in contention. Deadline deals can be made to improve the squad... The team will play with more competitiveness. Everything can change.

16 more wins... That's one more win every ten games... If anyone thinks that isn't do-able... They lack something or haven't really put it in perspective.

I think that Hicks 2013 would be better than Revere 2013 overall. So this makes the trade, in terms of 2013, a Span-for-Worley swap. A lot is going to depend on the next move the Twins make. If Dempster, Jackson, or Marcum are signed by the Twins I think the team could be in for substantial improvement. Last year after that horrendous start and the pitching meltdown they were really a 75-win caliber team (remember: the pitching was terrible, Plouffe was not utilized properly for awhile, Carroll was in a big slump, Morneau was coming back from a host of injuries, and Parmelee was up and down in a ridiculous fashion. It is possible that a Span/Revere - Hicks/Parmelee swap is actually a good switch for 2013 offensively. The pitching is already better and should get substantially better with just a bit of spending. A plus-.500 team seems reasonable. What that means for the division solely depends on the Tigers and . . . the Royals . . . ?? The other two are not going to succeed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Riverbrian

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by one_eyed_jack

Let me pose this question: how many games will it take to win the AL Central in 2013?

In 2012, Detroit won it with 88, 3 games better than Chicago. Nobody else had more than 72.

I think we're looking at a win total in the high 80's again - tops. If the Tigers stumble, it could be mid-80's. I don't see dramatic improvement from any of the other teams, the Whities will probably take a step back.

Could the Twins achieve 85-89 wins? Not likely, but I don't think it's beyond the realm of possibility either. If the Twins were in the AL West or East, forget it. But remaining competitive in this field is within reach, and quite achievable if some things break the Twins way.

---

Lets say its 88 games like last year... The Twins won 66 last year. Just 16 more wins and you are 82-80 and that puts you in contention. If you are in contention. Deadline deals can be made to improve the squad... The team will play with more competitiveness. Everything can change.

16 more wins... That's one more win every ten games... If anyone thinks that isn't do-able... They lack something or haven't really put it in perspective.

---

I would love to be wrong on this, but I don't think that this is likely, considering that there are only two decent starters on board, a pretty big hole in CF, a weak middle infield, and no great defenders in the outfield. I think that it is more likely that the Twins will lose 90+ games next year.

Jeez Glunn... You crush me... I have always counted on you to be Pro... even on the rainy days... You ain't the con type.

It's why everyone likes you.

Actually... For complete truth with my above scenario... Winning one more game out of ten is certainly do-able. But... Losing one more game out of ten is just as do-able. I just don't like bringing up that part.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by glunn

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Riverbrian

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by one_eyed_jack

Let me pose this question: how many games will it take to win the AL Central in 2013?

In 2012, Detroit won it with 88, 3 games better than Chicago. Nobody else had more than 72.

I think we're looking at a win total in the high 80's again - tops. If the Tigers stumble, it could be mid-80's. I don't see dramatic improvement from any of the other teams, the Whities will probably take a step back.

Could the Twins achieve 85-89 wins? Not likely, but I don't think it's beyond the realm of possibility either. If the Twins were in the AL West or East, forget it. But remaining competitive in this field is within reach, and quite achievable if some things break the Twins way.

---

Lets say its 88 games like last year... The Twins won 66 last year. Just 16 more wins and you are 82-80 and that puts you in contention. If you are in contention. Deadline deals can be made to improve the squad... The team will play with more competitiveness. Everything can change.

16 more wins... That's one more win every ten games... If anyone thinks that isn't do-able... They lack something or haven't really put it in perspective.

---

I would love to be wrong on this, but I don't think that this is likely, considering that there are only two decent starters on board, a pretty big hole in CF, a weak middle infield, and no great defenders in the outfield. I think that it is more likely that the Twins will lose 90+ games next year.

---

The off-season isn't even CLOSE to over yet. The Twins still have a ton of money they can spend. It's really pointless to start playing the whole "how many games will the Twins win next year:" when they still have 3+ months to fill the rest of the roster.

2 decent starters in the rotation is one more then we had 95% of last year, so there is a start!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SpiritofVodkaDave

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by glunn

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Riverbrian

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by one_eyed_jack

Let me pose this question: how many games will it take to win the AL Central in 2013?

In 2012, Detroit won it with 88, 3 games better than Chicago. Nobody else had more than 72.

I think we're looking at a win total in the high 80's again - tops. If the Tigers stumble, it could be mid-80's. I don't see dramatic improvement from any of the other teams, the Whities will probably take a step back.

Could the Twins achieve 85-89 wins? Not likely, but I don't think it's beyond the realm of possibility either. If the Twins were in the AL West or East, forget it. But remaining competitive in this field is within reach, and quite achievable if some things break the Twins way.

---

Lets say its 88 games like last year... The Twins won 66 last year. Just 16 more wins and you are 82-80 and that puts you in contention. If you are in contention. Deadline deals can be made to improve the squad... The team will play with more competitiveness. Everything can change.

16 more wins... That's one more win every ten games... If anyone thinks that isn't do-able... They lack something or haven't really put it in perspective.

---

I would love to be wrong on this, but I don't think that this is likely, considering that there are only two decent starters on board, a pretty big hole in CF, a weak middle infield, and no great defenders in the outfield. I think that it is more likely that the Twins will lose 90+ games next year.

---

The off-season isn't even CLOSE to over yet. The Twins still have a ton of money they can spend. It's really pointless to start playing the whole "how many games will the Twins win next year:" when they still have 3+ months to fill the rest of the roster.

2 decent starters in the rotation is one more then we had 95% of last year, so there is a start!

---

Easy to be an ahole at 3 in the morning vodkadbag. I agree it is early to get down on offseason but your tone is unneeded.

Simmer down, people. Most of the discussions on this board are pointless when you get down to it, be we all needs our Twins fix.

Even with the T-Wolves, my winter distraction, poised for their best season a long, long time, I still need a regular hit of baseball. And I haven't quite adjusted to the idea that the T-Wolves are relevant and the Twins are not. It's weird.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Twins Twerp

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SpiritofVodkaDave

The off-season isn't even CLOSE to over yet. The Twins still have a ton of money they can spend. It's really pointless to start playing the whole "how many games will the Twins win next year:" when they still have 3+ months to fill the rest of the roster.

2 decent starters in the rotation is one more then we had 95% of last year, so there is a start!

---

Easy to be an ahole at 3 in the morning vodkadbag. I agree it is early to get down on offseason but your tone is unneeded.

---

Did I miss something? Seems like your tone is a whole lot more contentious than his. And he's right -- it is pointless to be speculating how many wins the currently assembled roster would win. TR is probably not even close to finished yet.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nick Nelson

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Twins Twerp

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SpiritofVodkaDave

The off-season isn't even CLOSE to over yet. The Twins still have a ton of money they can spend. It's really pointless to start playing the whole "how many games will the Twins win next year:" when they still have 3+ months to fill the rest of the roster.

2 decent starters in the rotation is one more then we had 95% of last year, so there is a start!

---

Easy to be an ahole at 3 in the morning vodkadbag. I agree it is early to get down on offseason but your tone is unneeded.

---

Did I miss something? Seems like your tone is a whole lot more contentious than his. And he's right -- it is pointless to be speculating how many wins the currently assembled roster would win. TR is probably not even close to finished yet.

---

LOL this explains the private message he sent me at 4am with only the words "Suck my Poop" in the message box.

I'm not sure how I was being a jerk there, I was just pointing out how its a little silly and premature to jump all over Terry Ryan right now when this off-season when something like 80% of free agents are still available! Also it doesn't make sense to start making predictions when our roster is only about 70% complete (60% of rotation still needs to be filled etc etc)

If anything Ryan needs to be given some benefit of the doubt moving forward, he had some real nice pick ups last year, and has done a great job so far this year addressing our pitching depth in the minors. It seems like people have a hard time distinguishing between his track record and the track record of Bill Smith.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Riverbrian

Jeez Glunn... You crush me... I have always counted on you to be Pro... even on the rainy days... You ain't the con type.

It's why everyone likes you.

Actually... For complete truth with my above scenario... Winning one more game out of ten is certainly do-able. But... Losing one more game out of ten is just as do-able. I just don't like bringing up that part.

---

Hey, Brian, I am praying that your dream comes true. I am having a hard life right now and was struck by a sudden wave of reality.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nick Nelson

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Twins Twerp

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SpiritofVodkaDave

The off-season isn't even CLOSE to over yet. The Twins still have a ton of money they can spend. It's really pointless to start playing the whole "how many games will the Twins win next year:" when they still have 3+ months to fill the rest of the roster.

2 decent starters in the rotation is one more then we had 95% of last year, so there is a start!

---

Easy to be an ahole at 3 in the morning vodkadbag. I agree it is early to get down on offseason but your tone is unneeded.

---

Did I miss something? Seems like your tone is a whole lot more contentious than his. And he's right -- it is pointless to be speculating how many wins the currently assembled roster would win. TR is probably not even close to finished yet.

---

I don't want to be contentious, but to me the discussion is not completely pointless. It's sort of like can Superman beat up Thor -- never really going to happen but interesting to talk about while we wait for something more real to develop. And I agree that the name calling is not productive -- we are all Twins fanatics and therefore brothers who share a sacred bond,