Thread: Baltimore Sun's Connelly Thinks Saunders Isn't Winding Up In Minnesota

Originally Posted by mcrow

Oh...yeah forgot all about that.

They better be increasing payroll then.

Let's not forget, every team will be doing the same thing.

Originally Posted by nicksaviking

Late last decade the Twins had Baker, Slowey, Perkins, Blackburn, Garza and Liriano as rotation options. For most of that time they neglected free agent starting pitching because the spots appeared all locked up. I'd hate for the team to have any excuse to ignore pitching upgrades simply because in 2014, Gibson, Hendricks and Diamond are locks along with Correia and Saunders simply because they are already under contract. Saunders signed for 2014 should not be a concern when considering free agent pitching, but we've seen this club overlook free agents in the past because all five spots were "locked."

Yes, I think the Twins more than anything, as far as pitching goes, need an ace and continuing to have "5 spots locked" just gives them cause not to splurg on a big time pitcher. Ideally some of the $25M from the TV deal would be used to try to snag a good SP but I'm not even sure who will be on the market at that point.

Originally Posted by edavis0308

Let's not forget, every team will be doing the same thing.

Yeah, which makes the extra money buy you less in the market than it would have this year.

I agree that a contract of 2/15 or thereabouts given the $80M payroll and dollars coming off next offseason is not what makes this a questionable signing. I think they need to spend some of that money to give us some optimism and put people in the seats. I don't buy the argument that any dollars "unspent" this year necessarily become dollars to throw at someone in the 2014 offseason, or that they'll go over $100 million by the amount they are under $100 million this year. Because they won't.

My concern is with Joe Saunders. I think he's a valuable pitcher and can give you 185+ innings of middle-of-the-road stats on a different team. I think guys like Saunders do well on a pitching staff with a lot of hard throwers when his offspeed stuff is a variation from everyone else. I don't think he's so valuable in a rotation with Diamond, Pelfrey and Correia who all throw a little softer and nibble the edges, just like Saunders does. My way of thinking, he's just a little too much like those other guys, even if marginally/statistically better. Now, should we have signed Saunders at 2/$16 over Correia at 2/$10? But we've beaten that horse....

Originally Posted by ashburyjohn

Sorry, I thought saying "future Hall-of-Famers" would make clear my actual view. The Twins seem to be in a funny position with their 40-man, full of players much much much too valuable to expose to a waiver claim, yet not valuable enough to flip for a decent A-ball prospect of some kind if you wanted to make room for a free agent signing.

Me bad, i saw only 40 man roster =)

Right, contracts for free agents will be way up next year....making this the year to sign guys. Imagine what a good pitcher will cost next year, when every team has way more revenue. Imagine how cheap even 10 million per year will look.....

Originally Posted by nicksaviking

My issue with signing Saunders to multiple years mostly has to do with the fact that the front office could use it as an excuse to neglect the free agent pitching markent next off season. Though the 2014 pitching crop doesn't look strong at the moment, things could change. If there is a decent chance that the Twins will point to Saunders' salary and roster spot and say they can't afford the space or the money when there is a legit better option on the market who the Twins had a shot at snagging, I don't want Saunders.

I realize that neather salary or roster spots should be a concern, but I don't want the front office to have any excuses for neglecting the rotation next year either. Additionally, I'd hate for the Twins to sign Saunders and have the front office crow about how well they did with free agency this off season. Signing another back-of-the rotation starter is not impressive and I'd hate for the front office to pat themselves on the back about doing so. They need to clean house and in my opinion, their inactivity is the best shot at getting that accomplished. I'd hate for them to point to Saunders and say "We tried!" when in fact they clearly didn't.

There were legitimate and better pitchers avalibe this year, but i understand your thinking....

Here we go again! Back to the "why should the Twins spend more money when they aren't going to win anyway?" This subject has been covered over and over. Extend your logic of spending/not-spending and the end result is a minor league team of "hoped-for future stars" at minimum salary most of the time or a collection of veterans at the peak of their career earnings who are expected to "win-it-all", maybe once every 15 years.

Originally Posted by mike wants wins

Right, contracts for free agents will be way up next year....making this the year to sign guys. Imagine what a good pitcher will cost next year, when every team has way more revenue. Imagine how cheap even 10 million per year will look.....

Well, I guess we'll see if the Twins really will be sticking to the 50% of revenue or not next year because if they're looking at having ~$240m in revenue next year with the new TV Deal then they sure as hell better be over $100M in payroll. I have my doubts on that point.

Originally Posted by ThePuck

I read what you wrote...I just couldn't believe my eyes

Nothing wrong with dissenting opinions...but you seemed to think that your post wasn't understood. Saying people need to read what you said and asking another if he could read. We read it, we didn't agree with your position. Even if we kept Morny, it still wouldn't hamstring us in any way.

Originally Posted by ashburyjohn

Sorry, I thought saying "future Hall-of-Famers" would make clear my actual view.

Actually, the way things are going, Butera has a legitimate shot to be chosen for the Twins Hall of Fame.

Originally Posted by ThePuck

Nothing wrong with dissenting opinions...but you seemed to think that your post wasn't understood. Saying people need to read what you said and asking another if he could read. We read it, we didn't agree with your position. Even if we kept Morny, it still wouldn't hamstring us in any way.

I would say you are correct if we assume that the Twins will increase spending with the increased revenue. If they really intend to be in the $100M+ in the next couple seasons then maybe it makes sense. Budget or not I don't like Saunders for more than 2/$14 or so.

Lets see here a Saunders signing leaves the potential rotation at:

Diamond
Worely
Pelfry
Saunders
Corriea

Hendricks
Gibson
Dedunno
DeVries
and Harden (who will likely be in the pen)

No one said Corriea has to be in the starting rotation all year. Also he could be traded in July. Injuries occur and you can never have too much pitching. I say sign him for a 1 or 2 year deal. I don't think the 3rd year is prudent. I also think Saunders will have trade value with the extra year come next offseason.

Originally Posted by mcrow

I would say you are correct if we assume that the Twins will increase spending with the increased revenue. If they really intend to be in the $100M+ in the next couple seasons then maybe it makes sense. Budget or not I don't like Saunders for more than 2/$14 or so.

If they chose to stay at 80M in the future, that will be a self-imposed hamstringing of payroll...and likely wouldn't be in keeping with their supposed 50-52% rule they've told us for so long, which wouldn't be keeping their word when they talked about why the stadium was needed in the first place.

Originally Posted by ThePuck

If they chose to stay at 80M in the future, that will be a self-imposed hamstringing of payroll...and likely wouldn't be in keeping with their supposed 50-52% rule they've told us for so long, which wouldn't be keeping their word when they talked about why the stadium was needed in the first place.

True, but if I do the math right they are well below the $106M they for this year that would make the 50% mark of revenue. So, we really don't know if or when they'll really stick to that number.

Originally Posted by mcrow

Sure, assuming they stick to the 50% rule. However they are already below that for this season ($213m revenu in 2012) and we'll have to see what the revenue does in 2013 if they have another bad year when revenue stayed about the same last year as in 2011.

In theory they should be around $105M this year. So they'd have to increase payroll/spending by $30-$40M over this year to get to those numbers if my math is right.

Yes they are below that. That has been through several threads. About all I can say is I hope Morneau has a great year, Pelfrey and Harden come back strong and Ryan makes a trade for a middle infielder that works out like Shannon Stewart trade did.

Originally Posted by mcrow

I would say you are correct if we assume that the Twins will increase spending with the increased revenue. If they really intend to be in the $100M+ in the next couple seasons then maybe it makes sense. Budget or not I don't like Saunders for more than 2/$14 or so.

2/14 too rich for you? That kind of thinking is why there were only the signings there were this past off season.

Originally Posted by old nurse

Yes they are below that. That has been through several threads. About all I can say is I hope Morneau has a great year, Pelfrey and Harden come back strong and Ryan makes a trade for a middle infielder that works out like Shannon Stewart trade did.

Sorry, new to the forums and I didn't know there's been a ton of talk about that already. I just point it out because people seem to assume that the payroll will go up be we have little evidence of that being a sure thing.

Originally Posted by edavis0308

Let's not forget, every team will be doing the same thing.

Which is why this was the off season to over spend....

Originally Posted by old nurse

2/14 too rich for you? That kind of thinking is why there were only the signings there were this past off season.

2/14 isn't too rich but 3/24 is too rich, IMO. I don't think a guy like Saunders is worth three years unless it's a very good price, though in 3 years $8m might be a steal for any warm body that can toss a ball.