Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

Brock Beauchamp

Site Manager
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    32,519

  • 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 Tracker: Picks & Bonuses

Forums

Blogs

Events

Store

Downloads

Gallery

Everything posted by Brock Beauchamp

  1. Brock Beauchamp
    Uh.... Wilson Ramos becomes a free agent in about 10 weeks.
  2. Brock Beauchamp
    Yep. Short of demanding a top five prospect, the Twins can/should write their own ticket when it comes to Dozier's price tag. (and they might even be able to swing a top five guy if they bundle in something with Dozier) If you can't get elite talent in return, don't trade him. It's an easy decision.
  3. Brock Beauchamp
    What a crazy split. I knew the AL had several good 2B but this is ridiculous. Brian Dozier has 3.7 fWAR. That's only good for sixth-highest in the AL. In the NL, it's good for second best.
  4. Brock Beauchamp
    Those are definitely concerns but you have to try to make up any difference with the improved catching/pitching you get in return for Dozier. There are always concerns about trading an established player for a prospect (even with nearly surefire moves like Pierzynski to Mauer) but you can't let that get in the way of improving the team as a whole.
  5. Brock Beauchamp
    I've been meh on it from the outset. It wasn't a bad trade by any means but I didn't understand the accolades given it, either.
  6. Brock Beauchamp
    That'd be an acceptable approach, though I'd lean toward one high upside guy over a few lower guys. Yeah, any single prospect can fail but with Jay, Stewart, Gonsalves, etc. already in the org and approaching the high minors, I'd go with one top prospect. The Twins already have several upside-but-not-elite guys in the system.
  7. Brock Beauchamp
    It's hard to get a read on exactly where the Yankees are right now but I suspect they're not interested in a guy with two years of control. Given their age and the status of their on-the-fly rebuild, I think they're still some time away from picking up short-ish contracts to compete.
  8. Brock Beauchamp
    If you want to talk about a true "sell high" player, Brian Dozier is that player. While I'm typically against trading positional talent for pitching, it makes sense in this case. Coming off his 2016 campaign with two remaining years of control, you can set the asking price for Dozier. If you can find a contender with a gap at second and a top 15 pitching prospect in their organization, you kinda have to make that trade. Get a front line starting prospect and let Polanco run with the position. I like Dozier - I like him a lot - but the Twins need starting pitching if they're going to compete. Dozier is their best (only) chance to get that player and with Polanco behind Dozier in the organization, the risk is relatively low.
  9. Brock Beauchamp
    That's reasonable. I think it's possible Rosario ends up as a platoon or fourth OF but I'm not ready to accept that as certainty today. He has the ability to be a starter, it's only a matter of whether he'll tap that ability.
  10. Brock Beauchamp
    I don't get the "Rosario is a fourth outfielder" arguments. Is he a flawed player? Of course. He needs to fix some serious discipline issues to stick in MLB... But the guy OPSed around .800 in the minors and can play centerfield. He has the talent to be a starter and it's not fringy talent. It's legit MLB talent. There's a reason he posted on BP's top 100 list twice. Im saying this as a person who is not, and never has been, a big fan of Rosario.
  11. Brock Beauchamp
    An interesting footnote about Disney is that their two most successful purchases of the past decade - Marvel and Lucasfilm - became media goliaths through self-funded projects. The general rule in Hollywood is "never use your own money". But George Lucas did just that when he decided he wanted to sever all creative ties with the studio system and self-funded The Empire Strikes Back. Many people thought he was crazy but Lucasfilm wouldn't be the monster it is today without that decision. There's no freakin' way a studio would have allowed Lucas to charge forward with that script, as it broke all conventional thought about film sequels. The movie ended up defining the Star Wars franchise. Marvel, through an odd brokering of a deal that excluded Iron Man from a funding package they negotiated, decided that Iron Man was the best character to launch their studio so they funded the movie themselves. Sometimes, I guess bucking convention and doing it your own damned self can reap huge rewards.
  12. Brock Beauchamp
    I think Disney will make back that money within a year or two. It was a brilliant purchase. BAM doesn't only stream MLB games. They have several clients already on board, including HBO Now. It's already a profitable enterprise and will only become moreso in the near future. I liken this to Disney's purchase of Lucasfilm. Within a year or two, people will be asking "How'd they get that company for that little money?" Marvel was more of a risk, as it was an untried concept and Marvel itself was recently removed from a corporate collapse. But Lucasfilm was rock-solid and already printed money. With Disney's help, they were a virtual lock to start printing 10x more money within a few years.
  13. Brock Beauchamp
    It's not silly to punish them a bit because ESPN is a vital part of their operation but the extent of that punishment is out of line. Disney continues to grow despite ESPN floundering. That doesn't jibe with the 25%-ish drop Disney has seen in the past six months. I can understand the market doing something like that to, say, Amazon. Their P/E is waaaaay out of line and the stock price is based on future growth. If that growth falters, the stock can and should suffer mightily for it. But that's not the case for either Apple or Disney (particularly Apple).
  14. Brock Beauchamp
    I think so, yeah. I mean, it's not entirely out of the ordinary for the market to punish a stock over the short- to mid-term for silly reasons. Look what it did to Apple for 6-9 months. At one point, the stock was down 35%.
  15. Brock Beauchamp
    I hadn't put much thought into Shopify but, yeah, you make some good points. Though I'm loathe to invest in more tech... I'm already dangerously tech-heavy (unsurprisingly, as my job is in that industry).
  16. Brock Beauchamp
    I'm still in on Disney. Once the market pulls its head out of its ass (much like it's doing with Apple right now), they'll realize that Disney /=/ ESPN. Disney continues to forecast upward profits, the market continues to beat them down because of stupid ESPN. It's as if the market has forgotten Pixar, Lucasfilm, Marvel, and the toy juggernaut of Disney don't exist under the same umbrella.
  17. Brock Beauchamp
    Yeah...
  18. Brock Beauchamp
    Okay, I'm a little embarrassed how badly I misread Jeremy's sentence about the incident. Wait, no, this is the internet. It's obviously Jeremy's fault.
  19. Brock Beauchamp
    I can't speak for Jeremy but what I got from the article is the implication that Eddie changed something about his approach after getting hit in the face and the change stuck. He doesn't have to be afraid of the ball to have lingering effects from something that happened in 2012. It could have altered how he stood at the plate or swung the bat and if he never changed back, it could have a correlation to the beaning event.
  20. Brock Beauchamp
    It's possible but we're talking about nearly 1100 plate appearances of extreme splits versus 350 of slightly reversed splits. Which do we believe? A ton of McCann's recent value came from home runs and his home/road splits on those are jaw-dropping (2014-15 35/14 home/road split).
  21. Brock Beauchamp
    It will be interesting to see how the Ramos situation plays out this season. I could see most teams offering three years and somebody winning him with a fourth. Or I could see some team losing its friggin' mind and offering him five years. You never can tell with players of that type. He's coming off a career year but plays a premium position. He's been oft-injured but looked good in 2016. It all depends on what teams decide to prioritize (and you never know some some lunatic franchise like Arizona will swoop in and do something silly).
  22. Brock Beauchamp
    One interesting thing to note about McCann is that he's been superficially adequate with that contract. I can't combine multiple years because B-Ref is acting up right now but he has something like a +.150 OPS home/road split since going to New York. He's been a very bad hitter on the road and a very good hitter in Yankee Stadium. If he's not playing in Yankee Stadium 50% of the time, it's likely we're looking at that contract and calling it a terrible deal. Year: Home/Road 2016: .706/.776 (actually better on road this year) 2015: .857/.663 2014: .784/.591
  23. Brock Beauchamp
    There's no reason to exclude Posey, as he's only in his age 29 season. Mauer's age 29 season was good for a 140 OPS+ (much higher than Posey's current 122). Mauer followed that with a 142 OPS+ season and then the concussion happened. In short, Posey still has plenty of time to collapse in a spectacular and unfortunate manner. If anyone was a virtual lock to age gracefully, it was Joe Mauer... And we all saw how that went down.
  24. Brock Beauchamp
    I agree his return in July would have been better, if only for the longer period the new team would have him on the roster. But we didn't see much movement in the catching market this deadline, which leads me to believe teams just weren't very interested in shoring up catching.
  25. Brock Beauchamp
    But we're not talking about moving multiple, organizational-changing assets. We're talking about moving a single prospect that most teams have many of, often in excess. And if the offer is absurd, the Twins can simply say "Eh, Suzuki isn't worth that much anyway. We don't need your crappy prospect. Get lost." And then the contending team that claimed him, the one that actually needed a catcher, is left out in the dry. They still don't have that catcher and they burned a bridge for no reason. This isn't as one-sided as you're making it out to be. When the overall value and return is low, there is very little to be gained by trying to strongarm your opponent. After all, your team is the one who needs a player to improve their postseason chances. The other team is floundering anyway, they don't have much to lose in the short-term. In my experience, most business transactions play out amicably, not like a scene from a Michael Douglas movie.
×
×
  • Create New...