Minnesota Twins News & Rumors Forum
Page 6 of 10 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 120 of 197

Thread: Matt Capps, Bill Smith and the trade that ruined Twins baseball

  1. #101
    Quote Originally Posted by Brock Beauchamp View Post
    That the Twins are willing to spend more money if the right player is available, which renders the $80m payroll ceiling a figment of fans' imaginations.
    I expect the average fan to fall back on the extremely parochial view that the problem is FA spending. I am rather surprised that a crowd as baseball savvy as this group continues to focus on FA spending, especially given we are in a rebuilding phase. IF, they spent another $40M on FA, and IF they produced as expected (as we hope) the result would be approximately an incremental 6 wins. We still would not break 500.

    Did the Cardinals do it through FA? How about the A’s or the Rays? How about any team not in the top 5 in revenue.

    The Twins has 66 wins last year. So, they need to pick up 27-30 wins to contend. Even if you could go get whomever you like, the cost via free agency would be in the neighborhood of an additional $200M. The argument for is not about building a winner. It is about the gratification of having a given player or player(s) on the team. If you want to build a winner, that requires building, not buying, especially when other team s can outspend you two-fold. I am far more concerned about the development of our prospects than what FA they sign this year.

  2. These 4 users like Major Leauge Ready's post and want to buy him/her a steak dinner:

    birdwatcher (02-26-2014), Blackjack (02-27-2014), Brock Beauchamp (02-27-2014), thetank (02-27-2014)

  3. #102
    Senior Member Triple-A
    Posts
    301
    Like
    0
    Liked 43 Times in 32 Posts
    And how is the development of the Twins prospects going anyway? Quite well if one looks at the big picture and is patient. I would think by 2016 at the latest the team should be a contender if all goes well but I also think some key free agents must be sprinkled in with the youngsters for total success. So we'll see how that plays both with the owners and management.

  4. #103
    Bad trades? What about Tom Brunansky for Tommy Herr? For the current regime, it wasn't technically a trade, but everyone would probably like to go back in time and retract David Ortiz in exchange for spending reduction.

  5. These 3 users like Deduno Abides's post and want to buy him/her a steak dinner:

    cmathewson (02-27-2014), johnnydakota (02-26-2014), nicksaviking (02-28-2014)

  6. #104
    Senior Member Big-Leaguer
    Posts
    867
    Like
    467
    Liked 83 Times in 63 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Major Leauge Ready View Post
    I expect the average fan to fall back on the extremely parochial view that the problem is FA spending. I am rather surprised that a crowd as baseball savvy as this group continues to focus on FA spending, especially given we are in a rebuilding phase. IF, they spent another $40M on FA, and IF they produced as expected (as we hope) the result would be approximately an incremental 6 wins. We still would not break 500.

    Did the Cardinals do it through FA? How about the A’s or the Rays? How about any team not in the top 5 in revenue.

    The Twins has 66 wins last year. So, they need to pick up 27-30 wins to contend. Even if you could go get whomever you like, the cost via free agency would be in the neighborhood of an additional $200M. The argument for is not about building a winner. It is about the gratification of having a given player or player(s) on the team. If you want to build a winner, that requires building, not buying, especially when other team s can outspend you two-fold. I am far more concerned about the development of our prospects than what FA they sign this year.
    I would speculate that this is pretty much the conversation Terry Ryan had with Jim Pohlad awhile back.

  7. #105
    Twins Moderator MVP USAFChief's Avatar
    Posts
    6,604
    Like
    3,672
    Liked 3,164 Times in 1,353 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by birdwatcher View Post
    I would speculate that this is pretty much the conversation Terry Ryan had with Jim Pohlad awhile back.
    If so, then I would speculate Jim Pohlad is asking Terry Ryan why he signed those FA pitchers, if not to make the 2014 team better.
    Every post is not every other post. - a wise man

  8. #106
    Banned All-Star
    Posts
    1,498
    Like
    419
    Liked 75 Times in 49 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by JB_Iowa View Post
    To go even more off-topic, will there be game threads for the Spring Training games?

    Does somebody have the schedule for televised "away" games? I looked at the calendar on twinsbaseball.com but it looks like they only note the coverage on home games. I remember somebody posting somewhere about some televised away games.

    Thanks for any info!
    deleted
    Last edited by johnnydakota; 03-02-2014 at 12:08 AM.

  9. #107
    Banned All-Star
    Posts
    1,498
    Like
    419
    Liked 75 Times in 49 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by oldguy10 View Post
    How can any MLB team reduce their payroll by $12MM and expect to compete? This kind of non-spending by ownership puts the burden squarely on ownership, not management. What other MLB team is conducting itself in like manner? Please advise.
    deleted
    Last edited by johnnydakota; 03-02-2014 at 12:08 AM.

  10. #108
    Banned Big-Leaguer
    Posts
    715
    Like
    82
    Liked 40 Times in 29 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by USAFChief View Post
    If so, then I would speculate Jim Pohlad is asking Terry Ryan why he signed those FA pitchers, if not to make the 2014 team better.
    It definitely made the team better. The move was made to bring the worst starting staff in baseball toward respectability. What's underestimated is, it allows us to bring two of our most highly rated starting pitching prospects to Target Field when our favorite team feels they are ready, and not rushing them out of desperation. Further, although additional moves may be necessary, we have bridged the gap until our own numerous starting pitching prospects are ready in 2016 and/or 2017. All this was accomplished without taking on an albatross contract or touching our farm system.
    Last edited by howieramone; 02-26-2014 at 11:54 PM.

  11. These 2 users like howieramone's post and want to buy him/her a steak dinner:

    birdwatcher (02-27-2014), Blackjack (02-27-2014)

  12. #109
    Senior Member All-Star JB_Iowa's Avatar
    Posts
    3,319
    Like
    1,301
    Liked 1,280 Times in 740 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by johnnydakota View Post
    Apperently all home games will be televised, not sure if that is only on MLBtv or if it will be avalible in the cities on cable or not
    Thanks. Saturday's game is on FSN.

    I'll have to go visit each opponent's page to see about the possibility of seeing away games.

    And this is an official shout out to RB for at least a few game threads!!!!!!

  13. These 2 users like JB_Iowa's post and want to buy him/her a steak dinner:

    johnnydakota (02-26-2014), Riverbrian (02-28-2014)

  14. #110
    Banned All-Star
    Posts
    1,498
    Like
    419
    Liked 75 Times in 49 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by JB_Iowa View Post
    Thanks. Saturday's game is on FSN.

    I'll have to go visit each opponent's page to see about the possibility of seeing away games.

    And this is an official shout out to RB for at least a few game threads!!!!!!
    deleted
    Last edited by johnnydakota; 03-02-2014 at 12:08 AM.

  15. #111
    Senior Member All-Star
    Posts
    1,243
    Like
    105
    Liked 103 Times in 75 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by howieramone View Post
    It definitely made the team better. The move was made to bring the worst starting staff in baseball toward respectability. What's underestimated is, it allows us to bring our two most highly rated starting pitching prospects to Target Field when our favorite team feels they are ready, and not rushing them out of desperation. Further, although additional moves may be necessary, we have bridged the gap until our own numerous starting pitching prospects are ready in 2016 and/or 2017. All this was accomplished without taking on an albatross contract or touching our farm system.
    Of course it was to improve the team's record. But nobody would have been "rushed", there were "plenty of arms" in 2013 and the "open mike" continues with the acquisition of even more "arms" this off-season--and I don't mean Nolasco or Hughes. The rotation would have included most of the Red Wings staff with the requisite shuttling between Rochester and Minneapolis. Deja` vu. Given the ages of Meyer and Turner it isn't realistic to conclude that they would be "rushed" to the majors if they were on the Active Roster.

  16. #112
    Twins News Team All-Star TheLeviathan's Avatar
    Posts
    4,829
    Like
    176
    Liked 663 Times in 374 Posts
    I'm also confused by the notion that we gave out almost 100 million to have placeholders for prospects. That's some very gaudy placeholders.

  17. This user likes TheLeviathan's post and wants to buy him/her a steak dinner:

    birdwatcher (02-27-2014)

  18. #113
    Twins Moderator All-Star diehardtwinsfan's Avatar
    Posts
    4,378
    Like
    414
    Liked 811 Times in 511 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by Kwak View Post
    What evidence? The Twins said they made an offer to Garza. Few if any details--and nothing about the back-and-forth discussions, like what Garza requested--dates weren't given. My point--said they were "comfortable with $80-85MM" last year maybe they would be comfortable with more this year. But the coincidence of nearly identical payroll from year to year is illuminating especially in light of the previous statement.
    I don't understand this focus on payroll in a vacuum. The team needed pitching, they went out and spent nearly 100M on pitching, and we are complaining about the one that got away? I'll go a step further and note that Garza hasn't exactly been the model of health during his career either. Given the pitching injuries this team has had, that has to be taken into account.

    I get that the payroll is the same as last year. I'm not sure why that mattered. With the farm system as it is and the guys up here, there really isn't an easily upgradable need at any postion other than SS, and as we've discussed ad nauseum on this site, there isn't exactly a ton of sure thing SS out there.

  19. This user likes diehardtwinsfan's post and wants to buy him/her a steak dinner:

    birdwatcher (02-27-2014)

  20. #114
    Quote Originally Posted by USAFChief View Post
    If so, then I would speculate Jim Pohlad is asking Terry Ryan why he signed those FA pitchers, if not to make the 2014 team better.
    Of course they want to make the 2014 team better. There are however several other influences to consider that resulted in favor of this specific investment and the decline of others. The pitching was so bad that it was going to hurt both revenue and the Twins brand which has a long-term effect. They also did not even have any viable options to start the season with perhaps the exception of Gibson. It is debatable whether or not he would be “rushed” if brought up. Age has nothing to do with whether they are ready or not. Regardless of where any of us fall on the Gibson debate, the addition of Nolasco, Hughes, and Pelfrey provides assurance the Twins will finally field a major league pitching staff and end the parade of AAAA SPs. It also provides depth so that we don’t have the catastrophe we had in 2011.

    If we are going to speculate as to TRs conversations with Jim Pohlad, I would guess he also pointed out that these additions have the maximum impact on the team as compared to say Drew vs Florimon. They also provide good trading chips if we are so fortunate as to have all go well. And, they are not taking away ABs from the many players already on the roster that the Twins need to develop and assess this year. And, the final bonus is they did not require draft pick compensation.

  21. These 3 users like Major Leauge Ready's post and want to buy him/her a steak dinner:

    big dog (02-27-2014), birdwatcher (02-27-2014), Blackjack (02-27-2014)

  22. #115
    Senior Member Triple-A
    Posts
    301
    Like
    0
    Liked 43 Times in 32 Posts
    Major League Ready - kudos to you for the most reasoned post yet on the situation regarding the signings of Nolasco and Hughes.

  23. This user likes oldguy10's post and wants to buy him/her a steak dinner:

    birdwatcher (02-27-2014)

  24. #116
    Senior Member MVP
    Posts
    5,713
    Like
    1,159
    Liked 564 Times in 369 Posts
    Actually, the A's have several FAs on their roster, including an expensive Cuban. The Rays spent money on FAs this year also. And the Cardinals did sign some FAs to supplement their excellent drafting and developing players. So did the Rangers and Red Sox. The Yankees have been universally successful with mostly FAs.

    There is no "right way" to win. There is only winning.

    We've had this conversation. Had Ryan signed a good FA 3 years ago, then a good FA 2 years ago, then a good FA last year, this team probably would not have only won 66 games, and they'd have less holes, and we'd be talking about how they might compete this year. But when you decide to cut your budget, and not sign legit players, then unless your farm is flush (which it wasn't, but is now), your team will get worse. That's what they decided to do. Get worse. Not spend on legit FAs before this year (well, some would say KC was legit, I'd not agree).

    There is no "evil" in spending your budget to make your team better. There is no "one true way" in sports.
    Lighten up Francis....

  25. #117
    Senior Member All-Star cmathewson's Avatar
    Posts
    2,271
    Like
    241
    Liked 461 Times in 290 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by JB_Iowa View Post
    I don't believe that they have ever stated the exact reasons:
    http://espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/id/72...y-ryan-interim

    In order to discern what "philosophical differences" might mean, you have to look at what Smith was doing -- that would then imply that they wanted a different direction.
    That's essentially the grounds for my comments. If you look at what Smith did, he routinely traded prospects for aging and expensive players, something Ryan only did once in his career. Also, Smith showed very little understanding of positional value, twice trading ace pitchers, twice trading shortstops and once trading a catcher for pieces one can easily sign through free agency. He did also spend more money than Ryan by about 15%. But I don't think spending was the primary "philosophical" difference between Smith and Ryan. That's just s symptom of a more expedient approach.

    When they interviewed Ryan after he came back, he said, "I will be more patient than Bill," meaning, I suppose, that he will tend to take the longer view rather than the expedient view Smith took. In GM land, you exercise patience by focusing on the farm system and not trading prospects for aging and expensive players at positions of relative surplus.
    "If you'da been thinkin' you wouldn't 'a thought that.."

  26. These 2 users like cmathewson's post and want to buy him/her a steak dinner:

    birdwatcher (02-27-2014), Brock Beauchamp (02-27-2014)

  27. #118
    Senior Member All-Star
    Posts
    1,662
    Like
    11
    Liked 54 Times in 35 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by mike wants wins View Post

    There is no "evil" in spending your budget to make your team better. There is no "one true way" in sports.
    Be a good judge of talent and understand how it fits in with what you have. That would be the the one true way. Bill Smith IMO did not understand talent or how things fit together. Any team that is successful in baseball has a core of talent that they have developed.

  28. #119
    Senior Member Big-Leaguer
    Posts
    867
    Like
    467
    Liked 83 Times in 63 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by USAFChief View Post
    If so, then I would speculate Jim Pohlad is asking Terry Ryan why he signed those FA pitchers, if not to make the 2014 team better.
    Not sure I get your logic, Chief. Let's try speculating that Jim and Terry hold the same longer-term view of things. That would maybe explain the multi-year committments to those FA pitchers. They are improving in 2014 and beyond. And let's speculate that perhaps one of the reasons Ryan hasn't pulled the trigger on, say, Drew, is because the extra two wins in 2014 don't mean squat in the longer term, at least not enough to make a bad decision.
    Last edited by birdwatcher; 02-27-2014 at 10:54 AM.

  29. #120
    Banned Big-Leaguer
    Posts
    715
    Like
    82
    Liked 40 Times in 29 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by TheLeviathan View Post
    I'm also confused by the notion that we gave out almost 100 million to have placeholders for prospects. That's some very gaudy placeholders.
    If you are typifying my post #108 as saying we spent 84M solely for placeholders for prospects you are being silly. I will be happy to clarify the three distinct points I was attempting to make.

Page 6 of 10 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
©2014 TwinsCentric, LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Interested in advertising with Twins Daily? Click here.