Reusse: Twins and timid intersect too often

[ThePuck]

There were 15 pitchers this last offseason available in FA that had been average or better pitchers during the three years 2010-2012. I'm not really interested in rehashing this past offseason because everybody has already made up their minds and debating further won't change anything, however, I'm curious what makes you think the 2013-2014 FA class is so much better?

 

Depending on how this trade deadline works out the Twins could have as much as $80 million in payroll flexibility. Don't forget that each team gets an additional $25 million from MLB to spend.

 

If the mark is 200M dollars in revenue to make a 100M, and we're already at 18M below, and we've got quite a bit coming off the books this year. That's a lot. Then add the 25M too. Not sure if owners will pocket half that and only put 50% up for payroll or not, but any way you look at it, there should be a boatload of money available since about 25M come off the books replaced by pre-arbitraton players. 25M (off the books)+18M (not spent this year)+25 or 12.5M (TV contract money for each team. That's a lot of money.

[Oxtung]

If the mark is 200M dollars in revenue to make a 100M, and we're already at 18M below, and we've got quite a bit coming off the books this year. That's a lot. Then add the 25M too. Not sure if owners will pocket half that and only put 50% up for payroll or not, but any way you look at it, there should be a boatload of money available since about 25M come off the books replaced by pre-arbitraton players. 25M (off the books)+18M (not spent this year)+25 or 12.5M (TV contract money for each team. That's a lot of money.

 

Yeah, you're also assuming the Twins only brought in $200 Million in revenue, which is not at all clear. As you know Forbes believes they brought in much more than that.

[ThePuck]

Yeah, you're also assuming the Twins only brought in $200 Million in revenue, which is not at all clear. As you know Forbes believes they brought in much more than that.

 

Yeah, but as I understand it, a year's payroll is based on projected revenue for the season. So this year's payroll is based on what they projected to get in revenue this year. The season is only a bit over halfway completed. Their revenue last year, according to Forbes, was 214M I believe. I just took it down some. I doubt they projected under 200M or over what they made last year.

 

Also, if I was the one who brought up they could be fibbing about the numbers to the public, I'd be flogged in here. :-)

[Oxtung]

Yeah, but as I understand it, a year's payroll is based on projected revenue for the season. So this year's payroll is based on what they projected to get in revenue this year. The season is only a bit over halfway completed. Their revenue last year, according to Forbes, was 214M last year I believe. I just took it down some. I doubt they projected under 200M or over what they made last year.

 

Also, if I was the one who brought up they could be fibbing about the numbers to the public, I'd be flogged in here. :-)

 

To be clear, I have no idea what their revenue actually is. You also bring up a good point about projected revenue versus actual revenue. It is entirely possible both are correct. The Twins seem to be conservative in all other areas so it wouldn't be shocking if they were conservative in their revenue projections as well. Regardless if it's $40 M, $60 M or $80M there is going to be a lot of money available for the Twins next year.

[Jim H]

I understand that the Twins are bad, Ryan is in charge, so it is all his fault. And largely, thats ok. He is in charge and things aren't good, so yes it is his responsibility to fix it. But throwing out things that aren't true, or are merely pandering to the"Its all Ryan's fault" crowd doesn't help, either.

 

Ruesse has no idea whether spending a bunch a money on the Cuban pitcher is a good idea or not. Neither does hardly anybody on this board. Surprisingly, Ryan probably does. I suspect he has watched the guy pitch on multiple occasions. He probably has a filing box full of scouting reports on the guy. If he chooses not to get in a bidding war over the guy, he just might be right.

 

Calling him timid, is just silly. Here is a guy who traded his 2 best centerfielders and leadoff hitters for 2 pitchers who haven't pitched above AA and a guy coming off injury. Then he largely sets it up so the new CF has to be a guy who hasn't played above AA either.

 

What people seem to want is for Ryan to throw a bunch of money out there to "prove" he can take chances to make the team better. Ryan said in the offseason that the free agent starters were a weak group. Since almost all of them have pitched poorly, he must of been largely right. And still we have people claiming he should of spent more money, because he had the money to spend.

 

Now, I expect that Ryan will have to take a big chance at some point, to help the Twins get to the next level. Whether he will or not is a legimate question. Spending money can help you get better. But you have to make good decisions, and history has shown that giving older free agent pitchers large multi year contracts is seldom a good decision.

 

For all that people commend Detroit for taking "chances" and spending big money, they barely squeaked into the playoffs last year. They have a very small lead over Cleveland this year. They are pretty lucky that every team in their division is in a down phase, because it looks to me that this Detroit team would of had a hard beating almost any of the Central divison winners in the last decade.

 

Rip Ryan if you must, but try have at a few facts on your side. Ripping him for not spending on the international market could at least wait until the signing period is close to over. It might even be useful to see how some of these signings do after they are signed. Although it amazes me that people can make definitive statements about who did well in the international signings, when we are talking about 16 year kids who won't play in majors (if they ever do) for at least 5 years.

 

Here's the thing, it is Ryan's job to make the Twins competitive again. I think he will. But, he might not, he is not operating in a vacuum, he is competing with 29 other GM's with the same goal, and some of them probably have greater resources. He certainly can be criticized for any number of things, and probably should be. Unfortunately, Ruesse has largely made a career of of taking cheap shots and pandering to the lowest common denominator. To take anything he says about something like this and assume he has actually researched it and knows what he is talking about, is a huge reach.

[Monkeypaws]

One thing to consider: throwing a ton of money at 1 player might be a good strategy if said player will turn you from a pretender to a contender, or a contender to a favorite.

 

If it will turn you from a doormat to an also-ran, not so much, and not so attractive to players who can pick their destination.

 

Fiscally, having a young, homegrown core to build around has been a pretty good formula. The Twins are getting there, and will get there within the financial constraints the Twins have always operated under.

 

Buying high, especially for a wild-card player with no MLB experience, is risky business. For every Ichiro there is a Nishi, for every Yu Darvish a Dice K.

 

Reusse might call that timidity, but I'd call it common sense, or responsible, as opposed to gambling with limited resources.

 

If the guy works out, great, but if not, you've set the franchise back; again, this is less catastrophic for a teams that have already assembled a competitive core.

 

There's nothing timid about considering the cost of lost opportunity.

[Mike Sixel]

Given their salary structure for the next three or five years, how does signing a player to a big deal set back the franchise?

[TheLeviathan]

If he chooses not to get in a bidding war over the guy, he just might be right.

 

One might have said the same thing about Ryan's decision on Miguel Cabrera way back when. People are making this about just Gonzalez, but this particular situation is symptomatic of 15 or so years of timid behavior towards risks.

 

You bring up a lot of good points, but I think you missed Reusse's point. The Twins, regardless of resources available, regardless of talent available, regardless of team needs, and regardless of the avenue (FA, international FA, trading for established players) - just do not take risks under Ryan. That's what "timid" means. They have been totally unwilling to go outside of the narrow box they have put themselves in for team building and take chances.

 

I think we have almost 15 years of evidence supporting this claim. It's not a reach at all.

[ThePuck]

Given their salary structure for the next three or five years, how does signing a player to a big deal set back the franchise?

 

Was Howard Sinker's last article get discussed in here yet? If not, here it is:

 

A Fan's View | StarTribune.com

[Monkeypaws]

If the player fails a la Nishi, it's the cost of lost opportunity - those dollars won't be available for other free-agents.

 

I'm just being realistic; these are the Twins, not the Yankees. The big salary days of year 1 of Target Field were an aberration.

 

I saw a slideshow on Yahoo today about empty seats around MLB - the Twins were 14 of the 15 shown. Yeah, the product stinks, but Target Field, while considerably improving revenues, is not a bottomless pit of money.

[Monkeypaws]

Let's not confuse incompetence with timidity.

 

I always considered Philip Humber's perfect game major league baseball's attempt at trolling the Twins.

[Kwak]

I'm not a FO defender but when St. Peter says "we're comfortable with a budget in the $80-85MM range they were aware that this was a second straight year of cutting payroll. I got flamed this Spring by suggesting that the overall plan was to slash payroll and replace the expensive veterans with cheap rookies ("Source Please!"). Let's wait until next Spring and see if any major developments occurred. When I read comments like "we want to do this 'the right way' " my skepticism alarms. but, I guess patience must be in order before said claim can be repeated--but... .

[drjim]

It is totally a guess, based on his actions and statements. Clearly, only Ryan knows why he quit before. I should have just left that part out......

 

It is certainly possible he was afraid of signing a contract or two, but he also had been GM for 14 years and was probably worn out. It is almost unheard of for a GM to stay with one team for that long.

[drjim]

One might have said the same thing about Ryan's decision on Miguel Cabrera way back when. People are making this about just Gonzalez, but this particular situation is symptomatic of 15 or so years of timid behavior towards risks.

 

You bring up a lot of good points, but I think you missed Reusse's point. The Twins, regardless of resources available, regardless of talent available, regardless of team needs, and regardless of the avenue (FA, international FA, trading for established players) - just do not take risks under Ryan. That's what "timid" means. They have been totally unwilling to go outside of the narrow box they have put themselves in for team building and take chances.

 

I think we have almost 15 years of evidence supporting this claim. It's not a reach at all.

 

Do you mean they don't spend money? Because trading two major league CFs for AA pitchers seems like a risk to me.

[TheLeviathan]

Do you mean they don't spend money? Because trading two major league CFs for AA pitchers seems like a risk to me.

 

I would have considered that risky, but I'm not sure Ryan did. I think he was confident in Hicks being able to play. So I would grant they take some risk in deals where they move established talent for prospects.

 

But it's not as simple as money, because they also have never made any significant trades (especially at the deadline) that netted them an established star for prospects. So it's not as easy as saying "well they make risky trades" because even that isn't really true. It's very selective as well.

[Oxtung]

Jim you have many inconsistencies in your post. Also, you are misrepresenting the reasons for signing talent in the offseason. I don't care if you agree with those reasons but please don't morph them to fit your view point.

 

Ruesse has no idea whether spending a bunch a money on the Cuban pitcher is a good idea or not. Neither does hardly anybody on this board.

You dismiss Reusse and people on this board for wanting to sign the Cubans when they haven't any personal experience on the matter, which is true. However, you then turn around and make statements like this:

Surprisingly, Ryan probably does. I suspect he has watched the guy pitch on multiple occasions. He probably has a filing box full of scouting reports on the guy.

How do you justify your faith in Ryan when you have no personal evidence to support your claim?

 

What people seem to want is for Ryan to throw a bunch of money out there to "prove" he can take chances to make the team better.

 

No, what most people wanted was for Ryan to throw a bunch of money out there to actually make this team better. To add talent when we desperately needed it and had significant financial leeway to make it happen. It's just a bonus that it would also give hope that in the future when this team is competing for championships, assuming the added talent doesn't push us over the top immediately, that Ryan would spend or make a big trade and go all in for a World Series run.

 

Ryan said in the offseason that the free agent starters were a weak group. Since almost all of them have pitched poorly, he must of been largely right. And still we have people claiming he should of spent more money, because he had the money to spend.

 

You're misrepresenting here. The argument was 3-fold. First, we desperately needed pitching talent to compete. Second, we had plenty of money available to make a splash. Third, even if that splash didn't push us into contention we still had the opportunity to trade the pitcher and bring back a valuable prospect. Just like the Cubs and Brewers are set up to do. Instead Ryan scraped the barrel and we have Pelfrey and Correia, neither of which had any real upside to help the team compete, and even though Correia has been about as good as he can be, he is probably worth almost nothing on the trade market. That is what we had a problem with. There was no upside to his signings.

 

...history has shown that giving older free agent pitchers large multi year contracts is seldom a good decision.

 

This obviously depends on your definition of "good' but this is simply not true by almost any definition of good. I have done the research on this and would be willing to share it again if you want to know; just start a new thread and we can discuss this there so we don't drag this off topic.

 

For all that people commend Detroit for taking "chances" and spending big money, they barely squeaked into the playoffs last year. They have a very small lead over Cleveland this year.

How you can turn making the World Series into anything other than a success is beyond me. As for this year here is the standings by run differential:

1)St. Louis +127

2)Boston +91

3)Detroit +89

4)Atlanta +79

5)Cincinnati +63

....

Cleveland +25 (next closest in the central)

Twins -48 (7th worst in baseball)

 

The fact that baseball is flukey should not distract from the fact that this is a very good team. They have an incredible lineup and their starting pitching is about as good as it gets. I can only hope that the Twins will be be in Detroit's position within the next decade.

 

Ruesse has largely made a career of of taking cheap shots and pandering to the lowest common denominator.

He hasn't taken any cheap shots in this article. He has just pointed out that the Twins have huge holes in their starting rotation and there are opportunities to address that need that cost nothing but money, which the Twins have in copious quantities. Signing the Cuban pitcher would in no way hamper the Twins in the future even if he flat out failed like Nishioka. Yet the Twins seem to be unwilling to spend that money. It instead ends up in the Pohlad's pockets. How does that help anyone other than the owners?

[nicksaviking]

One thing to consider: throwing a ton of money at 1 player might be a good strategy if said player will turn you from a pretender to a contender, or a contender to a favorite.

That's not a bad arguement, though I really could care less if this team has another offseason signing four replacement level vets who could easily be cut for the guys in AAA. Continuing to sign the Carrolls, Marquis and Pelfreys is a bigger waste of money than signing one player for their combined salary who at least has a shot at being an upgrade.

 

If it will turn you from a doormat to an also-ran, not so much, and not so attractive to players who can pick their destination.

 

Fiscally, having a young, homegrown core to build around has been a pretty good formula. The Twins are getting there, and will get there within the financial constraints the Twins have always operated under.

Everyone on this board wants a young homegrown team, but there are still going to be holes and those holes will need to be filled in free agency. However as I said above, why spend your free agent money on bargain basement vets who's production could likely be duplicated by minimum wage AAA'ers.

 

Buying high, especially for a wild-card player with no MLB experience, is risky business. For every Ichiro there is a Nishi, for every Yu Darvish a Dice K.

If those are the odds, I'm buying. The Twins don't normally bat .500 when it comes to free agency. Prospects fail more than 50% of the time as well. Besides, the international signings from Cuba and Japan of late have been turning up roses more often than not.

 

Reusse might call that timidity, but I'd call it common sense, or responsible, as opposed to gambling with limited resources.

Why is it suddenly limited resources? The Twins have as many or more resources than most teams. They did not get to take part in the competitve balance lottery after all.

 

If the guy works out, great, but if not, you've set the franchise back; again, this is less catastrophic for a teams that have already assembled a competitive core.

Considering the flexibility the Twins have right now, a failed gamble would not set this team back what so ever.

 

There's nothing timid about considering the cost of lost opportunity.

That seems like a fairly accurate description actually. Basing your decisions on possible negative outcomes instead of basing them on possible positive outcomes is about as passive as it gets.

 

I hope the use of your quote for my rebuttal didn't seem too personal, it was just easier to counterpoint that way.

[Monkeypaws]

I hope the use of your quote for my rebuttal didn't seem too personal, it was just easier to counterpoint that way.

 

No prob.

 

I'm not defending the dog doodoo signings. I'd rather they tried doing it from within than going the nibble-nuts route. (Although I think Pelfrey was a good gamble).

 

And yes , I also agree you fill holes with free agent signings. You don't fill canyons.

Better to suck royally and get some Buxton, Stewart type talent in the system than settle into mediocrity.

 

Limited resources a la Pohlad. I don't expect these conservative midwest bankers to be spendthrifts. It's not like the Twins are owned by oil shieks. My expectations are tempered by just being realistic given their frugal history.

 

Just to be clear, i am not a fiscal conservative. However, I don't consider those who are as being timid or passive. Wrong-minded maybe?

 

Opportunity/cost is just basic micro-economic theory. I wouldn't call it passive or timid, but strict and draconian.

 

We may just be arguing semantics here....

[Oxtung]

Although I think Pelfrey was a good gamble.

 

Can you expand on that a bit? What did you like about it? I look at Pelfrey and see a guy that was extremely unlikely to be ready to go and be good to begin the season. He has been significantly below average for his career. His good years seem to be more about luck than anything else. He still had WHIP of 1.3xx. In his bad years he has been really bad with WHIP ranging from 1.4xx-1.7xx. So basically you have a poor pitcher coming off a significant injury. I just don't see what there is to like there.

[Alex]

Can you expand on that a bit? What did you like about it? I look at Pelfrey and see a guy that was extremely unlikely to be ready to go and be good to begin the season. He has been significantly below average for his career. His good years seem to be more about luck than anything else. He still had WHIP of 1.3xx. In his bad years he has been really bad with WHIP ranging from 1.4xx-1.7xx. So basically you have a poor pitcher coming off a significant injury. I just don't see what there is to like there.

 

Interesting that this is what we label as a gamble here (no offense to the person that said it) and exactly what some of us are talking about when we mention low risk. Pelfrey had very little upside even if healthy and was signed to a relatively cheap contract.

 

Overall I liked the signing, just as I would have been fine with another pitcher who shall not be named, too, had it been for back of the rotation filling. Instead, these low risk/low upside moves were the spearhead for turning this ML worst rotation around (or not, as we've now seen). Context is everything.

[diehardtwinsfan]

You dismiss Reusse and people on this board for wanting to sign the Cubans when they haven't any personal experience on the matter, which is true. However, you then turn around and make statements like this:

How do you justify your faith in Ryan when you have no personal evidence to support your claim?

Perhaps he read the article in this thread?

[Highabove]

"Your always window shopping but never stopping to buy"

1967 Billboard Hit Georgy Girl

 

The Twins have a knack for getting their name into the mix. As Reusse states, they usually find a reason to drop out.

 

[howieramone1406390264]

"Your always window shopping but never stopping to buy"

1967 Billboard Hit Georgy Girl

 

The Twins have a knack for getting their names into the mix. As Reusse states, they usually find a reason to drop out.

 

I think the same thing could be said for most organizations, in most professional sports. Once Gonzalez is signed and the full story comes out in the national media, I wonder if Twins fans will even recognize him as the same player Reusse wrote about. IMO the signing of Gonzalez is far from the slam dunk Reusse presents it to be.

[AlwaysinModeration]

To this point, a recent Heyman post puts the Twins in the mix for Gonzalez, and quickly says "he's too rich for them.". Why even bother!

[Dman]

If the player fails a la Nishi, it's the cost of lost opportunity - those dollars won't be available for other free-agents.

 

I'm just being realistic; these are the Twins, not the Yankees. The big salary days of year 1 of Target Field were an aberration.

 

I saw a slideshow on Yahoo today about empty seats around MLB - the Twins were 14 of the 15 shown. Yeah, the product stinks, but Target Field, while considerably improving revenues, is not a bottomless pit of money.

 

The other side of that argument is that not doing anything is opportunity lost as well. What if your free agent signing sets this team up for the next five years as a contender. it depends on if you want to focus on the positive or the negative in this regard.

 

The way Ryan is building this team now through the draft and not spending money means he has money to spend to try and hit the lotto in FA. If he guesses wrong in FA no big deal because he can still build through the draft etc. on the cheap. That is the issue that people are starting to bring up.

 

yes spending money just to spend it is dumb and buying pitching is risky but I don't know how you can explain to me that doing absolutely nothing is a better plan. That is the question. Doing something versus doing nothing.

 

If the Twins were cash strapped etc then we would all be waiting for contracts to expire etc but that is not the case there is money to spend and he needs to use those resources to take a chance. Even if it fails in the worst possible way at least we go down swinging instead of not even swinging the bat and getting called out on strikes.

[diehardtwinsfan]

To this point, a recent Heyman post puts the Twins in the mix for Gonzalez, and quickly says "he's too rich for them.". Why even bother!

 

The Twins were in the mix for Sano too, but that was dismissed as him being too rich for them as well. While I suspect Gonzalez won't sign with the Twins, I'm holding out hopes that they might sneak in and grab him.

[Dman]

I

 

What people seem to want is for Ryan to throw a bunch of money out there to "prove" he can take chances to make the team better. Ryan said in the offseason that the free agent starters were a weak group. Since almost all of them have pitched poorly, he must of been largely right. And still we have people claiming he should of spent more money, because he had the money to spend.

 

Now, I expect that Ryan will have to take a big chance at some point, to help the Twins get to the next level. Whether he will or not is a legimate question. Spending money can help you get better. But you have to make good decisions, and history has shown that giving older free agent pitchers large multi year contracts is seldom a good decision.

 

.

 

I largely agree that Ryan looked pretty good not going after a lot of the FA pitchers available this past year. With the exception of Grienke and Sanchez who I had as question marks injury wise he probably did better by not taking the big risk in FA. You could make a strong argument that TR did pretty well last year by not spending the money. Hindsight makes that much easier to see.

 

The thing about high risk, high reward is that you likely have a greater chance to fail more than to succeed, but that doesn't stop us from wanting to see home runs. In fact most everyone I know loves to see home runs and are willing to put up with strike outs to see them. For every home run there are likely three times as many strike outs. By staying pat in FA you save yourself from striking out but you also ensure no home runs.

 

The frustrating thing about TR is he has a long history of coming to plate in FA and never swinging for the fences. Granted back in the day he didn't have the payroll flexibility but he has it now. Will he ever try and buy us an ace or even a number 2 pitcher? I don' t think most us trust that he will. He just doesn't seem to have it in his DNA to do it. That is what we all are questioning and the main question is that if we have the money to take a chance why not do it? 3 out of four times we will likely strike out but we will also hit home run at some point as well and maybe that is the one that helps us win a world series. First we have to take a chance or two though.

 

I like TR and really think he is right person to rebuild the Twins. I as well as most fans have a ton of respect for TR. The only quibble I have with TR is FA. As has been said on this board before if he doesn't spend in FA in the next year or two then we might have problems down the road when we need to sign the young guys who have turned into stars. So if he doesn't use the funds soon it will be we need to save money to sign our own guys. He needs to make a move sooner not later.

[drjim]

I largely agree that Ryan looked pretty good not going after a lot of the FA pitchers available this past year. With the exception of Grienke and Sanchez who I had as question marks injury wise he probably did better by not taking the big risk in FA. You could make a strong argument that TR did pretty well last year by not spending the money. Hindsight makes that much easier to see.

 

The thing about high risk, high reward is that you likely have a greater chance to fail more than to succeed, but that doesn't stop us from wanting to see home runs. In fact most everyone I know loves to see home runs and are willing to put up with strike outs to see them. For every home run there are likely three times as many strike outs. By staying pat in FA you save yourself from striking out but you also ensure no home runs.

 

The frustrating thing about TR is he has a long history of coming to plate in FA and never swinging for the fences. Granted back in the day he didn't have the payroll flexibility but he has it now. Will he ever try and buy us an ace or even a number 2 pitcher? I don' t think most us trust that he will. He just doesn't seem to have it in his DNA to do it. That is what we all are questioning and the main question is that if we have the money to take a chance why not do it? 3 out of four times we will likely strike out but we will also hit home run at some point as well and maybe that is the one that helps us win a world series. First we have to take a chance or two though.

 

I like TR and really think he is right person to rebuild the Twins. I as well as most fans have a ton of respect for TR. The only quibble I have with TR is FA. As has been said on this board before if he doesn't spend in FA in the next year or two then we might have problems down the road when we need to sign the young guys who have turned into stars. So if he doesn't use the funds soon it will be we need to save money to sign our own guys. He needs to make a move sooner not later.

 

Would it be wrong to summarize your post as follows:

 

Taking another look at the FA options from last summer, Terry Ryan probably made the right decisions.

 

However, he should still have spent money because that would be exciting and he possibly would have signed one of the good free agents from last offseason that didn't actually exist.

 

Overall, there is no faith in Terry Ryan because he didn't spend on free agents when he was GM previously even though the payroll/revenue situation was quite different than today.

 

Even though the payroll/revenue situation is now different we have great knowledge of how Terry Ryan thinks and acts and have made conclusions about the years going forward based on this knowledge.

[Dman]

Would it be wrong to summarize your post as follows:

 

Taking another look at the FA options from last summer, Terry Ryan probably made the right decisions.

 

However, he should still have spent money because that would be exciting and he possibly would have signed one of the good free agents from last offseason that didn't actually exist.

 

Overall, there is no faith in Terry Ryan because he didn't spend on free agents when he was GM previously even though the payroll/revenue situation was quite different than today.

 

Even though the payroll/revenue situation is now different we have great knowledge of how Terry Ryan thinks and acts and have made conclusions about the years going forward based on this knowledge.

 

Yes I am contradicting myself as I have the benefit of hindsight but going in to FA you do not. Last year he appears to be proven correct but what if half of the pitchers last year turned out to be great and he missed out on them? We have hindsight to see that wasn't the case but several people last year thought other pitchers may have been good investments. In fact it is too early to tell as some of them might turn things around later but by and large it appears he was correct this year.

 

It isn't that spending money is exciting but it does give us a chance to be better while not spending or participating means you absolutely cannot get better.

 

I am taking license with my opinion of TR in regards to the no faith and thinks and acts comments but since he has yet to sign a big time FA to a large contract (i.e. Over 10 Million per year for 4 years or more) I think it is a fair assessment for now. I would love to eat crow on that statement but we will see.

 

Your comments are valid and I appreciate your insight but I stand by my earlier post.

[Otto von Ballpark]

Do you mean they don't spend money? Because trading two major league CFs for AA pitchers seems like a risk to me.

I don't think the trades were that risky - both of those CF had pretty shaky offensive games. Neither looked like more of a long term solution than Hicks.