Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

Brock Beauchamp

Site Manager
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    32,298

  • 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

Forums

Blogs

Events

Store

Downloads

Gallery

Everything posted by Brock Beauchamp

  1. Brock Beauchamp
    I've noticed we talk quite a bit about how the Twins might evaluate various Dodgers prospects but one thing we haven't talked about much is the guy we know they've evaluated a lot, both from the Cleveland perspective and the Minnesota perspective: Brian Dozier. We talk a lot about how the Twins need to make developmental changes up and down the organization but we're not really talking about how that might impact Brian Dozier, the best player on the team. It's entirely possible Falvey and Levine refuse to budge on Dozier because they're confident he's a perennial 35 homer guy now. They've seen Dozier play, evaluated both his 2013-2015 and 2016 mechanics, and have internal evaluation tools that dig much deeper than we can as outsiders. Combine that with a new hitting coach and it's possible they didn't move Dozier because the Dodgers were offering 3-4 WAR value for a player they believe is a 5+ WAR guy going forward. It's a risk either way but I don't think we've really considered where Falvey and Levine place Dozier and how confident they are about his 2016.
  2. Brock Beauchamp
    Make it a fair fight and flip those numbers.
  3. Brock Beauchamp
    It's more in comparison to Dozier, who has been a paragon of health for four seasons running. Forsythe simply doesn't have the track record to match that. That doesn't mean he's an injury risk so much it as it means Dozier isn't an injury risk (at least to the point any player isn't an injury risk). At its core, it's the same knock I had against De Leon. While I can't call him an injury risk because he hasn't pitched more than 140 innings in a season, it's a small knock against him that he hasn't done it yet.
  4. Brock Beauchamp
    In my post, that's why I offset my statement by saying Forsythe had two good seasons under his belt. One good full season, one good 3/4 season. But he only played in 127 games in 2016. That's good when you adjust for his WAR value but bad when you consider he's been in the league since 2011 and 127 games is his second-highest game total.
  5. Brock Beauchamp
    It's hard to get a read on Forsythe, in my opinion. His last two years compare pretty well to Dozier but he has two good years compared to Dozier's four good years (with one great year mixed in). Forsythe has also played just one full, healthy season at an acceptable clip for an MLB starter. Dozier has somewhere around 3.75 of those years in comparison (excluding his six weeks of play pre-2013 breakout, when he was still the old, bad Dozier). On the flip side of that coin, Forsythe is less of a commitment. While Dozier has two guaranteed years, Forsythe has one guaranteed and one option year. While I doubt that matters much to the Dodgers, it is a risk-mitigating factor that counts for something.
  6. Brock Beauchamp
    There aren't many teams who would give up much for Polanco. Contending teams want someone with less risk, a proven commodity. Rebuilding teams, more willing to take risk on unproven players, are loathe to trade prospects.
  7. Brock Beauchamp
    Yeah, it minimizes it a bit but even flyball pitchers put 30-40% of contact on the ground.
  8. Brock Beauchamp
    I agree Escobar is a better backup guy than a starter but I'd still rather see him at short than Polanco.
  9. Brock Beauchamp
    Hah, yeah, just the other day we were talking about the potential damage caused by keeping Dozier and how it creates a defensive domino effect throughout the infield. In no way am I accusing Nick of swiping the idea, just that many of us realize keeping Dozier has some effects that could hinder the team in 2017. Despite Escobar's flaws, I'm far more comfortable with him at short and Polanco at second than I am Polanco at short and Dozier at second. And that's not even bringing up the option of going glove-first at short, either through the minors (Vielma) or picking up a stop-gap solution for a season.
  10. Brock Beauchamp
    True, but I hope that problem departed with Terry Ryan.
  11. Brock Beauchamp
    Sure. The dollars aren't really a problem, it's more the length of the contract. Hughes is going to be paid by the Twins through 2019. Technically speaking, his extension hasn't even kicked in yet. And that's a discouraging thought. I hope Phil can rebound. The Twins need a competent starter and they don't need another albatross contract (even though it's not going to kill the payroll).
  12. Brock Beauchamp
    Yeah, if everything goes right with Santiago, you might be able to flip him for a C prospect. No one is going to give much for him. With that said, I didn't mind keeping Santiago. I was pretty lukewarm on the idea and didn't care much either way. But the Twins need pitchers. While we can lament the "logjam" of Hughes, Gibson, Santiago, Santana, Berrios, May, Duffey, that's not really much of a logjam. It's throwing a bunch of mediocrity at the wall and hoping five of them stick. And when you have 5-ish mediocre/rebound pitchers in the mix for rotation spots on Opening Day, there's a high likelihood at least two of them fail immediately and the "logjam" disappears by May 1st. I suspect all of this sorts itself out rather quickly. The only players I really care about on that list are Berrios and, to a lesser extent, May. As long as they're both in the rotation by May 1st (May will probably need to start there, otherwise he'll be relegated to the pen), I can't get too riled up about keeping Santiago in hopes he's not awful.
  13. Brock Beauchamp
    Yes. The only caveat is that I'm open to adding the DH to the NL and expanding rosters to 26 across baseball. With the DH and relievers, 25 men is a bit cramped. Adding one guy would make for better baseball, not worse. But 28 men? No way. I can only imagine how someone like Terry Francona would manage that roster. We'd see the first seven hour nine inning baseball game. Giving the managers a touch more flexibility is fine, letting them go hog-wild with substitutions and pitching changes is not.
  14. Brock Beauchamp
    Pretty much, yeah. The guy ended his career with a 141 ERA+, 25.8 K%, 7.0 BB%, .83 HR/9, and .263 BABIP. Oh, and he made 47 or more appearances 17 out of 18 years he pitched in baseball. The dude was dominant, consistent, and healthy.
  15. Brock Beauchamp
    It's absolute madness that Hoffman wasn't a first ballot guy. The Hall of Fame continues to make no sense.
  16. Brock Beauchamp
    While I agree the Twins should try a 1B platoon, we shouldn't expect too much from it. Vargas didn't have extreme splits in MiLB. He was slightly better against RHP most seasons, actually.
  17. Brock Beauchamp
    He would, but Dozier needs to go first. Trying to squeeze Drew, Escobar, and Polanco into 1.5 positions (full-time SS, part of 3B) is a tall order. If Dozier is gone and Polanco slides to second, I'd wholly endorse that move.
  18. Brock Beauchamp
    With Sano and Buxton, the upside is there where I'm willing to take a bigger risk in length and money. I'd want one, preferably two, post-arb seasons and I'd be willing to pay for them.
  19. Brock Beauchamp
    As I mentioned later, I don't go overboard criticizing the move, either, I simply don't think it was necessary. But overall, I'm conservative when it comes to paying players after a big season. I didn't want to do it for Dozier, either, but was fine with buying out his arb seasons because it was such a low-risk move. Little upside, little downside. And that move turned out to be a good one, as Dozier will be paid ~$10m less than what he would have received in arbitration.
  20. Brock Beauchamp
    Another good quarter for Netflix, up 8% in after hours trading.
  21. Brock Beauchamp
    I fully agree. That's not my wheelhouse in tech but I know a few people who are security experts. Next time I see them, I need to pick their brains and get some opinions.
  22. Brock Beauchamp
    Spring Training is a process. If a guy is down a few mph on March 1st, it's worth noting but not time to pull the fire alarm and run. If a guy is down a few mph on March 30th, then it's time to pay attention and potentially take action. My problem with the past few Spring Trainings is that people go into a five-alarm fire drill on March 10th.
  23. Brock Beauchamp
    I haven't ruled out Microsoft, as I like how they've repositioned themselves - ignoring their outright failure in mobile, which they've largely given up on entirely - but I'm wary of investing in more tech stocks, as that's over half my portfolio. Then again, I know tech so that's a plus. I see a roadmap for Microsoft and while it's not a huge gain stock, it's solid.
  24. Brock Beauchamp
    Damn, I completely forgot about Santiago. Gee, I wonder how that happened.
  25. Brock Beauchamp
    True, they didn't pay him market value. It was a calculated risk, one that didn't pay off. I'm not super-critical of the deal, I simply don't believe it was necessary. I'd rather see the Twins take a gamble on Phil Hughes after 2014 than pay one more damned cent to the likes of Mike Pelfrey or Kevin Correia.
×
×
  • Create New...