AM in the Twin's Booth...

[ledzepp8]

If he doesn't expect to be competitive, why should the veteran players play hard. What is in it for them exactly besides more golf and vacation time in October?

Saying you aren't going to try to be competitive is pretty much writing off the season before it starts.

Well this is just ridiculous. According to TyCobb, MacPhail said, "Need to fill some holes. Going to let our young players to play next year to see where we are at. Then we may look to add via FA".

Nowhere does that say he doesn't expect to be competitive or that the team isn't going to try and be competitive. You're the only one saying that. Even if MacPhail did say he didn't expect the team to be competitive next year, that's entirely different from saying that they aren't going to try and be competitive.

And you were wondering again why people say you derail threads...

[Frobby]

What is the point in doing this...so we can win 3 more games in 2010?

Makes no sense.

If we didn't have BRob, Figgins would make more sense but sense we have a CFer and a second baseman already, Figgins is a waste of money in a major way.

I haven't read the rest of the thread, but I could see some benefit to bringing Figgins here. I've watched this guy every time we play the Angels. The guy is a winning ballplayer, plain and simple. Fundamentally sound, mentally alert, and solid in the clutch. And, not over the hill. I think he'd be a really good mentor for the young players, and he'd be contributing on the field far more than the Kevin Millars of the world.

[Mashed Potatoes]

I haven't read the rest of the thread, but I could see some benefit to bringing Figgins here. I've watched this guy every time we play the Angels. The guy is a winning ballplayer, plain and simple. Fundamentally sound, mentally alert, and solid in the clutch. And, not over the hill. I think he'd be a really good mentor for the young players, and he'd be contributing on the field far more than the Kevin Millars of the world.

Figgins would contribute with his production via his bat and glove and speed as long as that lasted. His winning ballplayerness would change nothing, his mentorship over the younger impressionable minds would only be mentioned if we're winning, and will never be mentioned if we're losing.

His career splits say that he's worse in clutch situations than in non clutch situations.

2 outs, RISP: .687 OPS

Late and close: .721 OPS

Career average: .751 OPS

Intangible hater, out.

[Sports Guy]

I haven't read the rest of the thread, but I could see some benefit to bringing Figgins here. I've watched this guy every time we play the Angels. The guy is a winning ballplayer, plain and simple. Fundamentally sound, mentally alert, and solid in the clutch. And, not over the hill. I think he'd be a really good mentor for the young players, and he'd be contributing on the field far more than the Kevin Millars of the world.

And where do you play him?

Are you going to sit Jones, Bell and BRob a combined 5 games a week?

[BaltimoreTerp]

Figgins would contribute with his production via his bat and glove and speed as long as that lasted. His winning ballplayerness would change nothing, his mentorship over the younger impressionable minds would only be mentioned if we're winning, and will never be mentioned if we're losing.

His career splits say that he's worse in clutch situations than in non clutch situations.

2 outs, RISP: .687 OPS

Late and close: .721 OPS

Career average: .751 OPS

Intangible hater, out.

*round of applause* :clap3:

[mweb]

Two points.

First, how am I not in favor of blowing it up, considering I am in full agreement that the ONLY two players from the "before MacPhail" regime that I wanted to stay were Kakes and Roberts, and they will be the only two lweft standing after this season? Oh, what you meant was I am not in favor of whatever "blowing it up" means in YOUR mind? Now I get it. Tell me why again blowing it up means that you have to lose 90-100 games a year for 3 years before it is truly effective?

Second, Your statement that we won;t contend next year anyway is BECAUSE MacPhail has not done the corresponding moves to the "blow it up." Lets say in addition to the things he did last year, that we also signed Tex and Burnett, two guys from this area who made it public that they would be interested in coming here, IF THE PRICE WAS RIGHT? It would have cost us a bundle, but hey, MacPhail keeps saying "I have an owner who has made it known he is wiling to spend money on free agents." Really? Guess we'll see. But anyway, lets say we HAD made those two moves last year in addition to everything else he did. That would mean going into this offseason, we would look something like this...

2b: Roberts

LF: Reimold

RF: Markakis

1B: Teixeira

CF: Jones

C: Wieters

DH: Scott/Wiggy/Pie/Snyder

SS: Izzy or someone new

3B: Bell, Wiggy, or someone new

Rotation: Burnett, Matusz, Tillman, Bergeson, Hernandez

other candidates: Guthrie, Koji, Arrietta, Berken, Erbe, etc etc etc

Now does it look like we are SO far away from competing in 2010? Now if we use those trade chips to get a legit shortstop or third baseman or DH, does it look like 2010 would be another waste of a season?

The point is that MacPhail can make a case EVERY year that we're "not quite ready" to buy the free agents, but every yeat he is missing the boat and pushing us back an extra year. The young guys are great, but if you are seriously expecting a team of all young guys living up to their maximum potential to make us contenders, that's just not going to happen.

Fine, it's what I think it means, and what I think it should mean. However, no one said anything about losing 90-100 games 3 straight years. Even with doing little to nothing next year, the team shouldn't lose that many games.

I don't think 2010 will be a waste of a season at all.

Yeah, that team would obviously be closer to contention, however we would have wasted the first years of those guys' contracts, and likely the second year. Add that other player that you'd want, and I still don't think the team has much of a shot at the playoffs. Sure, if everything comes together, but otherwise, no.

I also don't feel those guys were worth the contracts they received, but there's no need to go back to that debate.

I don't buy that AM is pushing us back another year from contention at all, since as I expressed, I don't think the playoffs were close to being likely next year anyway.

And no one is expecting your last line either. Why do you feel the need to greatly exaggerate others positions?

[JTrea81]

Well this is just ridiculous. According to TyCobb, MacPhail said, "Need to fill some holes. Going to let our young players to play next year to see where we are at. Then we may look to add via FA".

Nowhere does that say he doesn't expect to be competitive or that the team isn't going to try and be competitive. You're the only one saying that. Even if MacPhail did say he didn't expect the team to be competitive next year, that's entirely different from saying that they aren't going to try and be competitive.

And you were wondering again why people say you derail threads...

From rshack's post:

We'll invest a year and find out how good some of these kids can be next year. There's certain holes we need to fill and, then, if they come along the way that we hope and think they might, I would think at that point it's appropriate to go out and maybe see what you can add through re-entry free agency.

What does "invest a year" mean to you? "Invest a year" to me means that they are going to spend another year evaluating instead of trying to compete and put a winning product on the field.

You can read into it what you want but bottom line, I expect them to tread water another year, when they could actually try to put a winning product on the field.

That should be unacceptable given the fact we are going to have had 12 losing seasons, and 2 seasons now under MacPhail that we've thrown away for rebuilding purposes. And now it's going to take 3 total if all breaks right, 2 of those being the first two years of Nick Markakis' 6 year extension and 1 of Roberts' 4 year extension, and we still aren't guaranteed to win anything.

And then he says he "maybe" will add via FA.

Yeah, that's a real confidence booster...

[clarence]

From rshack's post:

What does "invest a year" mean to you? "Invest a year" to me means that they are going to spend another year evaluating instead of trying to compete and put a winning product on the field.

You can read into it what you want but bottom line, I expect them to tread water another year, when they could actually try to put a winning product on the field.

That should be unacceptable given the fact we are going to have had 12 losing seasons, and 2 seasons now under MacPhail that we've thrown away for rebuilding purposes. And now it's going to take 3 total if all breaks right, 2 of those being the first two years of Nick Markakis' 6 year extension and 1 of Roberts' 4 year extension, and we still aren't guaranteed to win anything.

And then he says he "maybe" will add via FA.

Yeah, that's a real confidence booster...

Is there any chance that living in ME will somehow turn you to a bosox fan? You would be closer to Fenway and their gm does get "premium" talent.

[VTmook213]

Is there any chance that living in ME will somehow turn you to a bosox fan? You would be closer to Fenway and their gm does get "premium" talent.

Hahahahahaha. :clap3:

That should be unacceptable given the fact we are going to have had 12 losing seasons, and 2 seasons now under MacPhail that we've thrown away for rebuilding purposes. And now it's going to take 3 total if all breaks right, 2 of those being the first two years of Nick Markakis' 6 year extension and 1 of Roberts' 4 year extension, and we still aren't guaranteed to win anything.

You have the patience of an 8 year old or a 93 year old who wants to see his team win once more before he kicks the bucket. I can't decide which.

I like how you've decided that we "threw away" 2 years of winning under AM's rebuilding process. You act like if we weren't rebuilding we would've been fielding a winning ball club. I'm not sure how that and the other 10 losing seasons we've had really jive together. I will gladly take a third year of under .500 if it means our window to contend remains open for 3 years longer. Wouldn't you?

...and we still aren't guaranteed to win anything.

And what, pray tell, are we guaranteed to win if we trade for Adrian Gonzalez?