Physics Guy

Yet his OPS is 85,82, 79 and 104 the past 4 years. Florimon had 61 last year. I realize it's a small sample, but Cedeno most likely produces more with the bat and he has proven he can actually play in the majors. I'm not saying Florimon doesn't have a chance to be a starter, but I'd like to have another option besides Carroll who we might need at 2B or 3B. $1.15M is pretty cheap insurance.

I noticed Ronny Cedeno signed for 1.15M base plus 0.85 in incentives. That sure would have been a cheap insurance policy against Florimon falling on his face. I think Florimon has a chance to be a decent fielder, but his sub-70 OPS+ sure is a black hole at the bottom of the lineup. I guess I can live with one, but that assumes 2B and CF are decent (hopefully Dozier and Hicks).

I'm not sure I follow your point. In what way am I manipulating stats? Do I even express an opinion on them leading you to think I am using them to make a point? Yes, I think Hendriks is the 5th starter. The only other possible option that is acceptable in my mind is Gibson and I am skeptical they will start him in the rotation. DeVries and Deduno are injury fill-ins at best with little upside. Unless Hendriks is horrible in ST he absolutely should be given the season to prove himself. I did not complete my post because I wanted to think about it, but was curious what others might have to say about the data. At first glance, the staff going into 2012 appears to be much stronger. The problem is that it is heavily weighted by a pitcher who the Twins realistically should have been worried about after pitching 12 innings the previous Aug and Sept (I know, hindsight). Pavano was 35 in 2011 and starting to show his age. I would say the 2013 staff has a good chance of producing a 5 or better in WAR this year. My guess (and that is all it is): Diamond 1.8 Worley 1.8 Correia 0 Pelfrey 0.8 Hendriks 0.8 Yes, I realize this is optimistic, but not out of the realm of possibility. This is clearly better than the 1.2 that the best combination of 5 starters put up last year (minus Blackburn's -2.3!!!). It's not a division winner, but at least it might be watchable.

Hey look at this, we might actually be talking about baseball.

I choose A. My thoughts are that Hicks will replace what Revere brought and then some, but maybe not fully until 2014. I can live with it. I loved having Revere on the team, but I doubt his ceiling is much higher than where he was. I think Ryan traded him at the perfect time. Hicks has a significantly higher upside. He potentially is a better OF, gets on base as much and will hit for more power. I am mostly happy with what Ryan has done, but I totally get that people aren't happy about the 2013 team. I wish he had been a little more patient and signed one of the many other pitchers that signed one year deals instead of signing Correia, but I'm not going to lose sleep over it. Is it possible that DeVries or Deduno could have put up the same numbers as KC? Sure it is, but $5M per year isn't a huge cost. I'm not going to cry for Pohlad if next year's $5M is a waste. It won't financially prevent us from signing other players.

Just a comparison of start of 2012 vs start of 2013 (using B.R. WAR from previous season): 2012 Baker 4.2 WAR (12 IP in Aug & Sept) Pavano 1.8 WAR (35 years old, 262 H against, 4.1 K/9) Liriano 0.6 Blackburn 0.5 Marquis 0.5 Total 6.6 2013 Diamond 2.2 Pelfrey 0.9 (TJ surgery during season) Worley 0.7 (3.2 previous, arm trouble last) Correia -0.1 Hendriks -1.2 Total 2.5 Not sure where I want to go with this, but I thought it was interesting. 2012 was heavily weighted by Baker's best year to date, but being hurt the last two months.

Just give it up already. If you want to talk about baseball, talk about baseball and stop arguing with them. They want to vent, so let them vent and be done with it. Your arguing is just feeding the beast. At least half of this thread is about "stick banging". I couldn't care less that the Twins spent 2/$10M for Correia since it shouldn't have precluded them from making other signings. I don't understand the complaint about wasting $10M for Correia since the Twins have plenty of cash that will be left on the table. I do care that they didn't use the rest of the money they should have available. I have little doubt Correia will be an improvement over much of what they trotted out to the mound last year and as such should not be the focus of anger. I think there have been several references to Correia being the top signing. While this is probably true (Pelfrey may argue), my guess is that when Ryan traded Revere for Worley and May he felt that reduced the number of FA pitchers he needed to sign by one. Instead of signings, can we look at acquisitions? Isn't Worley a better acquisition than Correia?

You stated this about Worley in the article: "His real weapon seems to be the slider/cutter that breaks inside on a right handed hitter." The movement you describe would be that of a cutter for a lefty. Since I am not familiar with Worley's pitches, I assume you were referring to a two-seam fastball or sinker since Worley is right-handed.

Agreed and probably the prevailing opinion here.

I think if Ryan adds to the payroll it will be by extending players he trades for rather than signings through FA. If enough of our prospects work out, I am hopeful of him trading away some of it for a couple of solid regulars that a team that is looking to rebuild wants to dump. Examples this year might be Annibal Sanchez, Wandy Rodriguez, Blanton, Dempster ... I think TR would be more willing to sign one of those guys if he's already traded for him and had a chance to see him with the team for part of a season. Keep in mind I said "hopeful" he might do this, not that I expect it.

After reading about the signing today I had a feeling we might get a post.

I agree that the 2001 Twins were much more than Lawton/Radke. I'm also glad you said "arguably" because I would argue that Mauer and Morneau are likely to exceed Koskie and Hunter from 2001. They may not get the HR/RBI totals but their rate stats should be better (and were last year). Isn't it reasonable to conclude that Morneau's numbers should increase at least incrementally? 2001 Koskie 26 HR, 103 RBI, .276/.362/.488 121 OPS+ Hunter 27 HR, 92 RBI, .261/.306/.479 102 OPS+ 2013 Mauer 10 HR, 85 RBI, .319/.416/.446 141 OPS+ Morneau 19 HR, 77 RBI, .267/.333/.440 113 OPS+ I'll admit I've stayed out of most of the discussion regarding payroll and chose not to read most of the banter, but I have an honest question for those arguing that payroll should be higher or those complaining that it will be too low. Why does payroll necessarily have to be high for the team to be successful? By 2016 it is possible that only Mauer will have a large contract. A low payroll could mean simply that a large number of our prospects worked out and will only be reaching arbitration years. Worley, Diamond, Hendriks, Plouffe, Parmelee and Dozier will be in their arbitration years but not yet FA. Hicks and Arcia could be in their first year of arbitration. Isn't there a situation where the Twins can have both a good team and a low payroll? I am sorry if this has been addressed already. I just don't have the energy to go through the entire thread at this point.

Agreed, this is all speculation. We have no idea how Meyer, Gibson, et al will fare. All we can do is project from what the analysts say and I like our chances. Obviously Parker and Milone have produced at MLB level and our guys haven't yet, but the comparison is at least "reasonable" if not necessarily "likely". I feel much better that Ryan is the one making the decisions as opposed to Smith.

Next time, read the whole thing... "Here's what I think is reasonable: 2013 - Rebuilding year, Parmelle, Hicks, Arcia, Dozier, Gibson and Hendriks become full-time starters during the year 2014 - Competitive team (80 - 85 wins) - Benson or Roberts replaces Willingham in the OF, Meyer comes up mid-season 2015 - Contend for AL Central - Rosario, Sano and May potentially up at some point 2016 - Contend for AL Central - core developed in '13 is in fourth full season, Berrios, Buxton, Kepler ready? 2017 - Optimal year for contention - "second wave" of prospects to help fill some of the holes" ...then you would be right, we probably wouldn't be having the debate. I said it was what was reasonable all along, not necessarily likely. I don't think any of us have that good of a crystal ball. I will say that after looking back at '14 and '15 that might be a little agressive.

So you are saying the Twins can't produce pitching from the minors to replace Parker and Milone? Parker may have been a more highly rated prospect than we have, but Gibson, Meyer and May have on found their names on top 100 lists. I couldn't find evidence of Milone being that highly rated. Colon, McCarthy and Blackley/Griffin can be replaced by what we already have and potentially a middle-tier FA in the next two years (although most would doubt the second part after this offseason). Parker - Meyer Milone - Gibson Colon - Worley McCarthy - Diamond #5 - Hendriks/May/Wimmers/Berrios

And who said it was hard to tell sarcasm in emails and posts? You clearly have it mastered. You asked for proof, so I gave it to you. Way to go off the deep end. I'm not saying it's likely they contend in 2016, but it certainly isn't unreasonable. Is there any gray area in your world?

How about the 2012 Oakland A's as proof it can be done? Their top 5 hitters in AB: Reddick - Age 25, first full year, three partials Cespedes - Age 27, rookie Weeks - Age 25, second full season Crisp - 33, veteran Pennington - 28, 4 years, 3 as a starter Top 5 Pitchers (IP) Milone - 25, rookie Parker - 24, rookie Colon - 39, veteran McCarthy - 28, 7 year vet Blackley/Griffin - 29/24, both essentially rookies What do they have that the Twins can't manage by 2016?

They were also 81-81 in '84. Looking at the pitching staffs they sported prior to '86, I think we at least have the promise of performing better than those within two or three years. I'd be more encouraged if we could add one SP in the Jackson/Sanchez mold during that time. I understand your pessimism, but things can get better quickly as evidenced in '90 and '91. I realize we have sunk further than '90 at this point, but I don't think it has to take five years to turn this around. Anyways, I'm not sure why I'm wasting my breath, since I have no chance of changing your mind.

If ALL OF OUR PROSPECTS come up we will be trading some of them because we won't have enough spots for them. As for RIGHT AWAY, by 2016: Parmelee 28 yrs old, 3+ yrs in MLB Dozier 29, 3+ Plouffe 30, 4+ Arcia 25, 2/2+ Hicks 26, 2+/3 Benson, 2? Add Mauer and anybody else they add to the team to fill holes and it's not exactly like we're playing a bunch of rookies. I'm obviously more optimistic than you, but I'd say Parmelee and Plouffe have a decent chance to be at least 1-2 WAR players. I did some minor league comparisons and Arcia compares favorably with Cuddyer and Kubel with Arcia slightly more advanced. Cuddy and Kubel both put up 20+HR and 100 RBI at 27. Hicks' minors numbers compare favorably with Hunter who by age 25 hit 27/92 and was an All-Star at 26. Hicks probably doesn't hit for quite as much power but has better plate discipline. Both cases are probably near their ceilings, but it's also reasonable to assume they are at least league average by 2016. There is a decent chance neither Dozier nor Benson work out, but they have other guys to fill in for them prior to 2016.

My point in listing at least two guys at each position in my previous post is that at least they have some options and aren't pinning their hopes on one guy. Certainly some of these guys will not make it, but most are pretty highly thought of prospects. C and 3B are my biggest concerns. Mauer maybe won't catch at all by then and it doesn't seem as though we have an obvious replacement. Sano is no guarantee at 3B (although there is a decent chance) and Plouffe needs to prove he can do it for a full season.

Here is what the article stated: "This doesn't mean this is the only year that the team can contend, but rather which year should provide it the best chance for a World Series title." Here's what I think is reasonable: 2013 - Rebuilding year, Parmelle, Hicks, Arcia, Dozier, Gibson and Hendriks become full-time starters during the year 2014 - Competitive team (80 - 85 wins) - Benson or Roberts replaces Willingham in the OF, Meyer comes up mid-season 2015 - Contend for AL Central - Rosario, Sano and May potentially up at some point 2016 - Contend for AL Central - core developed in '13 is in fourth full season, Berrios, Buxton, Kepler ready? 2017 - Optimal year for contention - "second wave" of prospects to help fill some of the holes Obviously there will be holes to deal with (SS,3B or C), but Ryan has payroll flexibility. I doubt he uses a significant amount of it in FA, but maybe he would trade for a solution to those holes (taking on some payroll). 2017 Lineup C - Mauer?, Herrmann? 1B - Parmelle, Mauer, Sano? 2B - Dozier, Rosario SS - Santana, Polanco 3B - Plouffe, Sano? LF - Arcia, Roberts CF - Hicks, Buxton RF - Benson, Kepler SP - Meyer, Gibson, Worley, Diamond, Hendriks, May, Wimmers, Berrios

Thanks for stating exactly what I was thinking. You read all the time about teams holding back their top prospects to preserve team control, yet I don't recall a situation where I felt the Twins were doing that. For a team that doesn't seem to want to spend money it would be the smart thing to do. I generally am supportive of what Ryan does, but this is one area I think the Twins don't make good decisions. As for the individual players, I agree with keeping Gibson on a pitch count in the minors for the first 6 weeks. His post-surgery situation makes it easy to justify. I think Mastro would be fine as a fill-in for the first few weeks, so start Hicks in AAA. The team control is important, arbitration not so much. The Super-2 is hard to predict anyways and I don't think I would support keeping Hicks down that long unless Mastro tears it up in April and May.

To piggy-back on my last post, that is exactly why Boston wouldn't even consider it. I'm not trying to pick on JD because I see this sort of thing all the time on here. You can't just throw a bunch of guys together that aren't our top prospects and expect to get something great in return. The only way Boston would consider it (although Bogaerts is probably untouchable) is if we include a top 5 prospect at an area of need for them.

Sorry, but that is pretty crazy. No team is going to trade arguably their top prospect for Morneau and a bunch of sub-top 10 prospects. Quantity does not make up for quality. As much as I love Morneau, he just isn't worth that much. If he were, wouldn't they have traded him last year at the deadline. The other three guys are just throw-ins to try to sweeten the pot.

That's exactly what the Twins should have done with another 23 year old who went 7-15 with a 5.49 ERA back in '83. Frankie V only came back the next season to go 18-12 with a 3.21 ERA.