Well, they had a chance to chase part of the Thome/Nomar/Big Hurt trifecta and passed that up. Carlos Lee would make a good one or two year DH, but he'll want (and recieve) a longer contract than that, and I want no part of his decline years.

This past offseason, Liriano was the sticking point in a lot of negotiations. With him (and probably Garza) off limits, I'm not sure what kind of package the Twinks can put together for a big bat. I don't think we can build a good enough package for Cabrera, and there aren't really any other available impact bats at positions of need (third and center). If Lee would accept a two year deal, awesome. But outside of him, I can't come up with any realistic name. Nomar at third would probably have been ideal, but now that that ship has sailed, I've got nothing.

Well, they had a chance to chase part of the Thome/Nomar/Big Hurt trifecta and passed that up.

Huh?

Nomar is playing first base right now, and it's a large part of the reason that he's still healthy right now. If the Twins had signed him as a SS, they'd have been paying too much for a SS who was going to spend a lot of time on the DL. They couldn't have signed him as a first baseman, because they already had one. (And I'd say that holding on to Morneau was the right decision.) At third base, you might be able to make more of a case for him, but even then, the Twins would've had to pay a substantial amount more than the Dodgers because the whole point of this contract is to show that he's healthy and get a better contract, which would be much more difficult if he had to play on turf for half his games. And Nomar wasn't going to sign as a DH for the same reasons, because that would limit his value in the next offseason.

Frank Thomas was not going to play on turf this season when he had the option to play on grass for a team that looked better than the Twins at the beginning of the season.

And then for Jim Thome. Thome had a no-trade clause that allowed him to decide where he wanted to go, if he wanted to leave Philly at all. So Thome could have chosen to play for the White Sox, near his hometown of Peoria, Illinois, on grass, for the defending world champs, or he could have decided to play on turf, knowing he's had a history of back troubles, for a team that finished third in the division in 2005. Also, trying to distinguish Aaron Rowand and Torii Hunter at the plate this year is rather difficult:

.272/.317/.447
.265/.343/.431

Except that one of them has a salary that would have made him less desirable in a trade. And while Rowand doesn't have Hunter's reputation, he is still an above-average defensive CF. And the White Sox had a more reasonable replacement for Rowand in Brian Anderson than the Twins had for Torii with Lew. There are just so many reasons that there was no way the Twins were going to get Jim Thome in a move that improved the team.

Getting a free agent isn't a bad idea in and of itself, but none of these guys were in a position to accept a contract that was both to the Twins' benefit and to the player's benefit.

Sorry I'm late to the discussion -- in any case, I don't agree. The 2006 Twins are only evidence that last offseason's acquisitions were by and large not very good. Castillo's been passable so far, White was a statistical freakshow, and Batista was predictably bad.

Even so, the Twins still look like they're recovering from a poor start to contend for the wild card, and would be contending for the division crown in a normal year too. The "impact players" are already there -- Mauer, Morneau, Cuddyer, Kubel, not to mention the pitchers. This team can and should win with an average 2B, Stewart or a career-average White at DH, and Koskie + injury replacement(s) at 3B. It hasn't fully happened this season thus far, but that doesn't mean the next logical step is to go after a "big bat".

I agree with ubelmann that "Getting a free agent isn’t a bad idea in and of itself" but most of the scenarios preferred by fans are unrealistic, and often would still leave us with a need for quality contributions from lower-tier acquisitions like those above.

Keep in mind that just getting to 45-35 has required three weeks of unreal play from nearly top to bottom of the roster. Even though I like the retooled team better than the Opening Day squad, I don't expect that this group plus some minor tinkering will be the solution to getting back on top next year.

Starting at 45-35 would be fine in a division that lacks a hot frontrunner or rich powerhouse; the AL Central in 2002-4, in other words. But the Central has become a much stronger division since the Twins last won it. At this point even last season, the Twins at 46-34 were still 8.5 games behind Chicago, and had Cleveland right on their heels. The Indians are underperforming this year, but could be a spoiler down the stretch, and then of course Chicago and Detroit now are the class of the league.

Part of the reason the division is suddenly so much stronger is because the Twins' competitors are spending more money. The White Sox have a payroll of $102.75 million, and the Tigers have a payroll of $82.6 million. Unless those teams are hit by terrible luck or start beating themselves, the Twins in the near future can't get by with kids surrounded by mediocre talent playing .550 ball until the stretch run anymore. They have to maximize the value of their spending, go get some premium talent when the opportunity arises, make every dollar count.

Fair enough -- I think we'd all like to see that payroll number rise. I just don't think Hunter's $12 mil for 2007 is the deciding factor for that -- any additional players will likely require payroll commitments past 2007 anyway, and Hunter's $12 million will quickly be eaten up by our rising stars.

If you're talking extension, I'll probably agree -- market rate for Hunter could mean at least 4 years at $10+ million per, and I can't imagine the Twins would be interested in that, given Hunter's limitations and his age.

Whoops, I posted that in the wrong thread. My mistake.

In any case, I agree the payroll shouldn't be frozen, but I don't think the current team really constitutes "kids surrounded by mediocre talent" -- the kids are quickly becoming stars, and "mediocre talent" can and should be valuable role players (i.e. Castillo, cheap Stewart, career average White, etc.). With our staff, and our blossoming young hitters, I don't think we need to create a "murderer's row" 1 through 9, ballooning our payroll to Tigers and White Sox levels.

Luis Castillo has a .238 EqA, 4.3 runs above replacement-level, playing suspect defense on bad legs, costing the club $5 million. Stewart is a declining corner OF with no power, not much speed, also playing suspect defense on bad wheels, costing the club $6 million. Those are exactly the kind of guys TR needs to get off the payroll, along with Torii Hunter, so he can get some real quality to play with his emerging stars.

I didn't necessarily mean Stewart and Castillo specifically. But that type of player, at their age and condition, would probably get Rondell-type money, incentive-dependent, for a one-year deal. Those kind of veterans, role players, are much better than T-Bat longshots, and as long as you have a solid core to your batting order and pitching staff, they should work out fine.

"Real quality" by your definition is going to cost more -- possibly a lot more -- than Hunter's $12 mil, and unless you raise the payroll 50%, you're still only going to fill one position that way. You'll still need to enlist the services of the above mentioned type of guys.

spycake:
“Real quality” by your definition is going to cost more — possibly a lot more — than Hunter’s $12 mil, and unless you raise the payroll 50%, you’re still only going to fill one position that way.

I disagree. The only reason TR couldn't go get premium talent next winter is if he's wasting too much of his budget on players like Hunter, Stewart, Castillo, Silva, and maybe even Radke.

If TR can sign a couple productive fill-ins at under $3 million apiece, fine. I think that finding productive bats in the bargain bin is even more difficult and subject to chance than what I've suggested, though. He should do even better if he trusts cheaper in-house players to fill those marginal roles, and thinks big when he goes shopping for his major needs.

In the next year, the Twins are going to be looking at a rare opportunity when nearly all of its best talent will be young, cheap, and on the rise or at the top of their game, while the contracts for every expendable veteran will be expiring. There probably will never be another time in the next decade (or more) when the Twins GM has so much freedom and spending clout to go out and add stars to play with the stars already at the core of the roster. This is a wide-open window of opportunity.

If Terry Ryan instead sits back to just wait for his young core to mature, keeps Hunter at $12m because he's familiar, already under contract, and the club can afford it, and uses the rest of his budget on more Rondell Whites because the team should at least be "fine" with those kinds of veterans in support of the young studs, then he will have blown it, thrown away a prime opportunity to ride Santana/Liriano/Mauer/Morneau/Nathan to a championship.

You know, we came fairly close to championship territory in 2002 and 2004 with a worse team than what we have now. I'm not saying that's an excuse to "settle for mediocrity" as you like to say, but there's more than one way to achieve that end goal, and not all of them involve an open checkbook on the free-agent market.

If TR keeps Hunter for 2007 and fails to acquire a big-name "impact player", will you simply judge the offseason as a failure? Regardless of the circumstances, the market, etc.?