Yeah, but they don't let our outfielders sit in the stands 20 rows back.....

Solo HRs can't beat you  

Well, the expectations for Hughes are pretty low around here. I’m calling a W for Phil on Sunday.

 

Why on earth would the Twins need a fifth starter on Sunday? They had an off day yesterday.

 

Although, to be fair, maybe you start Hughes on Sunday against the Rays instead of virtually guaranteeing yourself a loss against the Yankees with him on the mound.

 

That has to be the reasoning right?  It's just downright evil to make a guy who hasn't started in almost 9 months to make his 1st start back against the Yanks and that lineup.

The Rays on Sunday are having a “bullpen game”.

 

I put the over/under on total runs at 15.5.

 

Whaddya think?

That has to be the reasoning right? It's just downright evil to make a guy who hasn't started in almost 9 months to make his 1st start back against the Yanks and that lineup.

I think it's actually been 11 months since Hughes has started a MLB game.

I am happy they chose Hughes. 2-3 poor starts and we can release him & eat the rest of the contract.

Why on earth would the Twins need a fifth starter on Sunday? They had an off day yesterday.

 

Although, to be fair, maybe you start Hughes on Sunday against the Rays instead of virtually guaranteeing yourself a loss against the Yankees with him on the mound.

They're virtually guaranteeing a loss against any team he faces...

I am happy they chose Hughes. 2-3 poor starts and we can release him & eat the rest of the contract.

If he's on that short of a leash, why not just release him now?

 

I'm certainly not holding my breath waiting for them to cut him.

They're virtually guaranteeing a loss against any team he faces...

Dunno. The Rays aren’t exactly a powerhouse. The Twins probably lose with Hughes on the mound but it’s not a given.

Well, we have to take a $13 million look at Hughes.

 

Imagine that. He's making more than Lynn!

That extension doesn’t look good now but I don’t recall thinking it was a bad idea then. Part of the risk for a mid market team is that it isn’t reasonable to throw away these sunk costs.

 

They committed 13 years to Hughes, Santana and Nolasco and have a good return on 3 of those 10 years thus far. That is not a recipe for success.

That extension doesn’t look good now but I don’t recall thinking it was a bad idea then. Part of the risk for a mid market team is that it isn’t reasonable to throw away these sunk costs.

 

They committed 13 years to Hughes, Santana and Nolasco and have a good return on 3 of those 10 years thus far. That is not a recipe for success.

They gave him a 5 year extension one year into a 3 year contract. What was the rush? He wasn’t going anywhere. Decisions like that are exactly why Terry Ryan was fired.

They gave him a 5 year extension one year into a 3 year contract. What was the rush? He wasn’t going anywhere. Decisions like that are exactly why Terry Ryan was fired.

Turns out it was a horribly bad decision. I wonder if it was viewed that way at the time.

Turns out it was a horribly bad decision. I wonder if it was viewed that way at the time.

It was by most of the people on the message boards I was on at the time. For that reason. Because it was unnecessary.

It was by most of the people on the message boards I was on at the time. For that reason. Because it was unnecessary.

Actually here it was pretty well-received. Of course, we were all drunk on Hughes's record K/BB ratio. And alcohol.

 

John Bonnes was a prominent voice of dissent on the deal.

 

I am happy they chose Hughes. 2-3 poor starts and we can release him & eat the rest of the contract.

He's probably lucky they chose to have him start on Sunday.   If they would've had him start on Monday-Tuesday he'd probably get only one start.  Getting thrown to the wolves versus the Yankees and all.

Honestly, if we're gonna start him I'd rather it be against the Rays. I'd prefer the Royals but take what you can get I suppose.

after the first two games, do you stand by this?

Actually here it was pretty well-received. Of course, we were all drunk on Hughes's record K/BB ratio. And alcohol.

 

John Bonnes was a prominent voice of dissent on the deal.

seems to me, there were a number of posters who agreed w/ Bonnes. Maybe 50/50 or 60% approval. There were a loud group at the time wondering why you’d extend a (any) pitcher after one year

They gave him a 5 year extension one year into a 3 year contract. What was the rush? He wasn’t going anywhere. Decisions like that are exactly why Terry Ryan was fired.

Yes

I think my characterization is accurate:

 

http://twinsdaily.com/topic/16336-article-twins-extend-phil-hughes/

 

I didn't say it was universally loved here, but certainly most approved, and most objections seemed pretty mild.

 

I fully admit I was quite wrong, and quite drunk on the record K/BB ratio. Bonnes was right, the remaining 2/16 was such an incredible value, it really didn't make sense to tear that up for a longer, more expensive deal. I guess we were writing off Nolasco at the time and looking for a replacement, but really it wasn't prudent.

 

after the first two games, do you stand by this?

Sure. He wouldn't have been able to keep the offense from crapping the bed, or the bullpen from letting 2 of 3 get away. Would you rather start him against NY? If they're going to make the decision to start him then letting him pitch against Tampa is a much better bet than letting him go against the Yankees.

Edited April 23, 20188 yr by TFRazor

I don’t think it is a coincidence that Fernando Romero started yesterday for AAA. If after 2 or MAYBE 3 more Hughes starts the results are as we expect, a swap out becomes pretty easy.

Sure. He wouldn't have been able to keep the offense from crapping the bed, or the bullpen from letting 2 of 3 get away. Would you rather start him against NY? If they're going to make the decision to start him then letting him pitch against Tampa is a much better bet than letting him go against the Yankees.

point exactly. It doesn’t matter who he starts against, but if you’re choosing to punt on a start, should it be against a team you have a chance to win against otherwise?