Brooks Lee's Stock is Already Rising

4 minutes ago, PDX Twin said:

Maybe, as the son of a coach, he will already know how to bunt and hit to all fields, skills that the Twins seem unable or unwilling to develop in their prospects.

No reason to know how to do either of those now. They just changed the rules to make it easier for pull-happy hitters.

Why is Dalton Shuffield at the St. Paul Saints and not Brooks Lee, for the final month of the season?

28 minutes ago, DJL44 said:

No reason to know how to do either of those now. They just changed the rules to make it easier for pull-happy hitters.

With the old rules using a left foul line to right foul line approacht and intentionally striving no to swing for home runs, Rod Carew was much better than the very good and valuable Luis Arraez, hitting .350, .359, .364, .388 with the approach that Max Kepler doesn’t use. It remains to be seen if Kepler’s pull oriented approach benefits from fielders being aligned as they have for 164/167 years of baseball.

I think Lee is an extremely exciting prospect. I can’t wait for him to join the Twins offense. If he has nearly the same impact as the Twins hitter of the year last year, Jose Miranda, it will boost the Twins as their offense clearly needs upgrading. 

When I was much younger, I watched my Brewers draft a young high school shortstop who was with the team the next year.  That was the beginning of Robin Yount’s Hall of Fame career.  Someday some team will draft a young man who will be the next Yount.  Yes, Lee isn’t an 18 year old pick.  But why can’t it be the Twins who get this special player?  And why can’t he be Brooks Lee?

39 minutes ago, Rosterman said:

Why is Dalton Shuffield at the St. Paul Saints and not Brooks Lee, for the final month of the season?

Better question - why are they playing Sheffield at 2B when they could have promoted Edouard Julien?

34 minutes ago, Rosterman said:

Why is Dalton Shuffield at the St. Paul Saints and not Brooks Lee, for the final month of the season?

He was hitting very well even if in significantly less at bats. I looked back at his college record and it was pretty awesome. I don’t really know why he leapfrogged Lee.  At first, I thought maybe it was because of Polanco’s injury and they might be planning on playing him a few games at St. Paul, then up to the Twins to play 2nd base. If he’s up to it, this could strengthen the team but getting Gordon back in LF, thereby strengthening the OF, if only a bit.

"And nobody bunts anymore. You're going to have to give up on that dream. There are very few situations where bunting makes sense."

If it was a dream, it was a recurring dream for 100 years.  And every team in baseball was having that dream.    

Somehow it made sense for 100 years, but not now.  Did the game change, or did the players?  Kind of like when the NBA went to the 3 point shot, nobody thought practicing free throws was worth it anymore.   And yet, when a guy hits the other way to advance a runner, or hits a fly ball that does the same, it is referred to as "a productive out", and everyone high fives him.  Hmmmmm........a productive out, and a bunt.........let me ponder that.    

Looking ahead to ‘24, could our core starting four infielders be Miranda, Lewis, Lee and Arraez? If so, who plays what position?

Let’s assume Lewis is at SS. Could Lee play 2B with Miranda at 3B and Arraez at 1B? Or is Lee at 3B, Arraez at 2B, and Miranda at 1B.

Regardless, that’s a strong (and pretty cheap) starting core infield.  
 

(Just for kicks, Larnach, Buxton and Kiriloff in the outfield.  Jeffers at C.  Gordon, Wallner, Isola and maybe Martin as core backups. Not too shabby.  Lots of money left over for FA pitching and whatever hole we need to fill, i.e. catcher, etc.). 

18 minutes ago, Mark G said:

"And nobody bunts anymore. You're going to have to give up on that dream. There are very few situations where bunting makes sense."

If it was a dream, it was a recurring dream for 100 years.  And every team in baseball was having that dream.    

Somehow it made sense for 100 years, but not now.  Did the game change, or did the players?  Kind of like when the NBA went to the 3 point shot, nobody thought practicing free throws was worth it anymore.   And yet, when a guy hits the other way to advance a runner, or hits a fly ball that does the same, it is referred to as "a productive out", and everyone high fives him.  Hmmmmm........a productive out, and a bunt.........let me ponder that.    

But there is a difference swinging the bat and bunting. Your chances of getting a hit on a fly ball or hitting to the right side of the infield are much higher than laying down a bunt. 

While all these things move runners over the odds of the bunt resulting in an out are significantly higher than the others. 

2 minutes ago, chpettit19 said:

Let's hope they are able to make smart moves to supplement the young guys while getting the young guys to perform to the best of their potentials! 

You nailed it. It’s one thing to have the players, it’s another to get them to maximise their potential. Hopefully, we find the right leadership and system to make that a reality.

8 minutes ago, chpettit19 said:

In this hypothetical I think I go Lee-Lewis-Arraez-Miranda from left to right. Definitely Lee and Lewis on the left side, though. They have significantly better arms than the other 2 so they're the ones I want making the longer throws. 

It's fun to dream on what this team can be if those 4 hit their peaks. And you add in that OF trio at their peaks and the offense looks really nice, and cheap! There are some real things to hope on for the future of the Twins. Let's hope they are able to make smart moves to supplement the young guys while getting the young guys to perform to the best of their potentials! 

This all depends on development. If those 4 peak as you say. You can often dream on what the team may look like based on top prospects, but development into star major leaguers is a big leap. For example, Buxton and Sano. "Buxton, Sano named No. 1 and No. 3 prospects | FOX" (headline clicked from a search for history's sake). 

Just gotta keep him healthy.  WAY TOO MANY great prospects in Twins history have looked great until something happens.....

So far looking like a great pick!

Nothing can go wrong.  He's a lock to be a perennial all-star starting with as soon as the Twins call him up.  What were other teams thinking?  He's obviously the best player in the draft, except for the player we would have gotten if Lee had already been picked.

1 hour ago, chpettit19 said:

Outs are bad. A productive out is better than a non-productive out. But both are bad. Teams no longer find it useful to freely give up an out to advance a base runner 1 base (especially from 1st to 2nd) when it doesn't actually increase your chance of scoring. You may not like it, but that's the new reality of the league and it's not going to ever get back to the point where offenses are willing to give up their most valuable asset for anything outside of an actual run scored.

It was a recurring dream for 100 years that pitchers didn't throw splitters either. Do you want Duran or Maeda to quit throwing their splitters because nobody threw one for 100 years? We've gotten smarter and adjusted how we play the game because of it. Sacrifice bunts are bad baseball outside of a couple very specific situations. For 100 years it was also every team's dream to have a SS who could field, but not hit. Same with 2nd basemen. No 2B are expected to be legit bats and a SS better be able to hit and field. 

You can ponder whatever you want, but the provable fact is that bunting is bad strategy. I'm sorry if you don't like that change in the game, but it's one you're going to have to accept. (Now bunting for a hit against the shift is a different story, but with the shift ban next year it's probably a less useful tool)

Ah, yes, we are so much smarter now.  And everything we did then is out of date, and who would ever think about "old school" baseball?  Would I want pitchers to stop throwing pitches that clearly are blowing their arms out?  Let me see............YES!  Would I rather have pitchers throwing 240, 260, or, just maybe, 300 innings a year, vs. 140, 160, or, just maybe, 200 innings?  Let me see.......YES!  And I would rather have guys moving runners along, meaning into scoring position, if the situation calls for it.  And, yes, the situation doesn't always call for it.  But waiting for hits, or home runs, has gotten us where?  Scoring 3 runs or less 45 plus percent of the time.  That is a statistical fact.  Maybe a little small ball would be appropriate now and then, new reality or not.  And defense in your infield..........wow, what a concept.  Might just be that it is worth at least a little bit.  Teams still look for it.  

Please don't take all of this as an insult. ,or a pure assessment that you, or anyone who thinks alike, is totally wrong.  It is just an assessment that "old school" is not totally wrong either.  A mixture of both just might be the mix we need to get more out of the roster we have.  

2 hours ago, Nashvilletwin said:

Looking ahead to ‘24, could our core starting four infielders be Miranda, Lewis, Lee and Arraez? If so, who plays what position?

Let’s assume Lewis is at SS. Could Lee play 2B with Miranda at 3B and Arraez at 1B? Or is Lee at 3B, Arraez at 2B, and Miranda at 1B.

Regardless, that’s a strong (and pretty cheap) starting core infield.  
 

(Just for kicks, Larnach, Buxton and Kiriloff in the outfield.  Jeffers at C.  Gordon, Wallner, Isola and maybe Martin as core backups. Not too shabby.  Lots of money left over for FA pitching and whatever hole we need to fill, i.e. catcher, etc.). 

And is Austin Martin still in the mix, perhaps?

Would Lewis be a bet to play in the outfield. Who knows how durable Buxton wil

6 hours ago, chpettit19 said:

There are very few situations where bunting makes sense.

Yeah. It’s usually only late in the game or extras, where one run wins the game. Who cares about that.