Jump to content
Joe Ryan versus the Rangers, join the conversation! ×
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

Brock Beauchamp

Site Manager
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    32,403

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    328

 Content Type 

Profiles

News

Minnesota Twins Videos

2026 Minnesota Twins Top Prospects Ranking

2022 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks

Minnesota Twins Free Agent & Trade Rumors, Notes, & Tidbits

Guides & Resources

2023 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks

The Minnesota Twins Players Project

2024 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks

2025 Minnesota Twins Draft Pick Tracker

2026 Minnesota Twins Draft Pick Tracker

Forums

Blogs

Events

Store

Downloads

Gallery

Everything posted by Brock Beauchamp

  1. Brock Beauchamp
    Methinks you’re over-dramatizing this by a lot. One of the worst blown saves in the history of the org? No. And going 0-2 is not a big deal on the grand scheme of things. The game sucked. It was an awful watch almost front to back and the 9th/10th were just cherries on top of that crap sundae. But ultimately, it’s one game of 162, just like the rest. Let’s not overreact just because it’s the first game we’ve seen that counts in six months.
  2. Brock Beauchamp
    This was an ugly game that was lost by bad defense, something I don’t expect to see often this season. Shrug it off, 161 more to go.
  3. Brock Beauchamp
    Nick's opinion probably has a lot to do with Arraez being 5'10". Even Carew, who played in a time when players were much smaller than today, was still 6'0".
  4. Brock Beauchamp
    So many things about loanDepot cause me pain. Like the fact that the name uses camelcase and starts with a lowercase "L", which reads as an uppercase "i", completely confusing the user FOR ABSOLUTELY NO REASON. Or the fact that phonetically, the name sounds like "Home Depot", a much more well-known brand to users. Everything about the name is laughably bad and it's some of the worst high-level branding I've ever seen in my life, particularly from a company that makes enough money to sponsor a professional sports arena.
  5. Brock Beauchamp
    The Twins can certainly "put pressure" on Bally Sports but ultimately, they have little to no leverage to do anything about the situation. The Twins, like most pro sports franchises, sell their broadcasting rights to another company and once that ink is laid to paper, the broadcasting agent has most of the power to exercise those rights as they see fit, as the sports franchise gets paid either way. I'm sure there are clauses that prevent "no broadcast to anyone" but I'm equally sure there is a lot of leeway to drop some providers and grant access to others. Which sucks for consumers. As is the case so often today, we're stuck in the middle of billionaires yelling at each other while we don't get the service we expect.
  6. Brock Beauchamp
    Though at least with the previous regime, there was a lengthy track record of being absurdly cautious with pitching prospects despite the MLB team being awful. The situation is quite different now.
  7. Brock Beauchamp
    That’s a stretch without any evidence to back it up. The Twins may have bungled this decision but it’s equally possible Rooker is satisfied with and understands the decision. We literally have *zero* information about the conversations that happen around these kinds of promotions and demotions.
  8. Brock Beauchamp
    I’d also prefer to see Rooker play every day but the AAA season doesn’t start for over a month. And unlike Kirilloff, Rooker doesn’t really have any development and/or service time questions. He’s already 26 and has hit quite well in the upper minors.
  9. Brock Beauchamp
    I understand some of the confusion and questioning the moves but people tend to talk with way more certainty about these kinds of moves than is warranted. Ultimately, it’s unlikely either decision makes much of a difference to W/L in the grand scheme of things. Though I’m a bit bummed for Rooker in the short term.
  10. Brock Beauchamp
    I hoped to see Rooker but eh, okay. I hope Garlick does well and it all works out. Astudillo doesn’t surprise me in the least and I’m not a huge fan of the guy or anything. He has bad versatility but it’s still versatility. And he’s a solid choice for pinch-hitting, allowing Baldelli to slot him around the field for a couple of innings. It’s not a bad skill set for literally the last guy on the roster. If his OPS craters like it did in 2019, I don’t expect him to last long and that may be the end of Willians in a Twins uniform.
  11. Brock Beauchamp
    While I think you're mostly on the right track in the sense that strikeouts are bad, lack of walks mean virtually nothing. Again, spring training stats DO NOT MATTER. No one walks in spring training because the entire point is to hit the ball and get to game speed. No one spits on pitches and works a nine pitch walk because no one is here to do that.
  12. Brock Beauchamp
    And that’s exactly why they make these (every year) controversial cuts two weeks before the season begins.
  13. Brock Beauchamp
    Fair enough, we’re saying many of the same things. The only part where it appears we differ is that I believe many things happen and exist that are not reflected in a box score. A player could look fantastic in so many ways and have an atrocious box score, and vice versa. Ultimately, the box score doesn’t tell the team anything they don’t already know, though it may confirm what they already know.
  14. Brock Beauchamp
    They go on the data they have available, which is about a month of workouts and training. Is that enough? Probably not but it’s what they have.
  15. Brock Beauchamp
    Did they keep them based on spring training box scores, though? I feel like there's a correlation and causation issue you're missing here. Certainly in the case of Wisler and Harper, a refined pitch approach led to better spring results but without the underlying analysis that led to that altered approach in the first place, the shiny box scores wouldn't exist. So did the Twins look at the box score and make a decision or did they see individual potential, make analytical-based changes, and then base their decision on the changes they saw within that player? It's almost surely the latter, rendering the box score analysis somewhat irrelevant. And if the Twins were swayed by box scores, it was coupled with loads of more nuanced data and analysis we do not have, which makes basing opinions only on box scores really misguided. We're looking at *maybe* 10% of the data and challenging the decisions of people who have 100% of the data.
  16. Brock Beauchamp
    Bolded: Yes. Absolutely, yes. The stats don't matter. But there may be correlation to success that are displayed through successful box scores, such as plate discipline, exit velocity, and launch angle. But there are also troublesome box scores that may want to influence but mean little to nothing, such as Garlick batting .350, which skews his entire triple slash line and is unsustainable.
  17. Brock Beauchamp
    The vast majority of spring training happens outside a box score and that’s where the Twins are making their decisions.
  18. Brock Beauchamp
    Right?!?!?! I'm excited to see what Rooker can do. As I mentioned in another thread, he has done nothing but succeed since being drafted and I hope he continues that streak in a Minnesota uniform this season. It's also a bummer for Kirilloff because if a damned pandemic didn't drop on our heads last year, it's likely he's also in a Minnesota Twins uniform right now alongside Rooker. Frankly, this situation is pretty muddy and there isn't a clear answer, I can see the validity of both sides. And while it's fine to be disappointed for Kirilloff, the certainty felt by some about the decision one way or the other is quite unwarranted. It's a tough call to make.
  19. Brock Beauchamp
    Even if Rooker doesn't make the roster, there's virtually a zero percent chance he's taken off the 40-man roster and at this point, I believe he's close to a lock to make the 26-man for Opening Day. He's something of a defensive liability but given that he's a capable RHB, he's pretty badly needed in both the lineup and specifically the OF alongside a Cave platoon.
  20. Brock Beauchamp
    I think there's a pretty good chance for Broxton to stick with the organization, knowing that Buxton is Mr Glass and he's the best (only?) reasonable AAAA backup behind him in an org that plans to contend for the division. I think he probably gets lost in the shuffle that is the mad dash of last-minute demotions that happens before Opening Day and if he has an opt-out (again, haven't looked into it), I suspect he won't get much more of an opportunity to log MLB games than he would in Minnesota and there's a good chance he opts to stay here in the org.
  21. Brock Beauchamp
    The expectations for Cave and Broxton’s bats aren’t close to a wash. Cave has proven himself a capable MLB hitter, Broxton has not... and Cave is quite a bit younger, to boot.
  22. Brock Beauchamp
    Why prioritize Rooker’s playing time right now? Maybe because the Twins feel they’ll field a better team in April by doing so. And it’s not as if Kirilloff will be sitting around doing nothing. I’m sure he’ll be playing some form of extended spring training, though it’d be a lot better (and an easier decision to make) if MLB hadn’t postponed the AAA season.
  23. Brock Beauchamp
    Can someone explain to me why we're so bullish on Garlick? Because of 28 Spring Training plate appearances? Come on, people, you've all been baseball fans long enough to know better than that. Even ignoring the bit about rusty pitchers and facing MiLB quality talent, Garlick could have five bad games in a row and his stats are pedestrian, if not terrible, again. Sigh.
  24. Brock Beauchamp
    That's a pretty raw deal for Cave, who looks particularly appealing as a platoon candidate with Rooker and has all but earned an MLB roster spot until he shows otherwise (I'm basically writing off all 2020 performances because there are so many crazy, unexplained oddities in individual performances).
  25. Brock Beauchamp
    I don't think anyone here is crazy enough to measure Garlick's worth over Kirilloff but bench guys are needed and if it comes to one or the other sitting around and doing nothing five days a week, I choose Garlick. As for Rooker, the picture gets a lot muddier if you compare him to Kirilloff. Previous MiLB performances are pretty outdated at this point but Rooker hit quite well in the upper minors (~.850 OPS) while Kirilloff scuffled (~.750 OPS, largely due to injury but the numbers are still there) and Brent has a lot more experience facing higher calibre pitching. Rooker is a lot older and likely closer to his peak self as of today. And, to be blunt, the team probably doesn't care as much if Rooker receives inconsistent playing time at the MLB level while they're more focused in on Kirilloff's development arc. I can see some pretty legitimate arguments for keeping Kirilloff in the minors for now without even factoring in service time.
×
×
  • Create New...