Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

Brock Beauchamp

Site Manager
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    32,669

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    328

 Content Type 

Profiles

Minnesota Twins News, Rumors & Analysis

Minnesota Twins Videos

2026 Minnesota Twins Top Prospect Rankings

2022 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

Minnesota Twins Trade & Free Agent Rumors

Minnesota Twins Fan Guides & Resources

2023 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

The Minnesota Twins Players Project

2024 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

2025 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

2026 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

Forums

Blogs

Events

Store

Downloads

Gallery

Everything posted by Brock Beauchamp

  1. Brock Beauchamp
    Nice.
  2. Brock Beauchamp
    A perfectly adequate signing. Not my first or even second choice but a fine signing. The team is better now than It was six hours ago and probably not by an insignificant amount.
  3. Brock Beauchamp
    I’ve been in a couple retractable roof stadiums. Give me Target Field every single time. I have no desire to watch baseball surrounded by walls, even if the ceiling is gone. Never mind that a retractible roof meant that TF couldn’t be in downtown Minneapolis, one of its biggest selling points.
  4. Brock Beauchamp
    Without a doubt but my first choice would be to send both packing. Nothing against Adrianza, he was pretty good in the role while with the Twins, but it's probably time to move on from both him and (definitely) Marwin.
  5. Brock Beauchamp
    It depends how one approaches the problem. Is it peak, career, or a blend? Mantle’s peak was as good as anyone in the history of the game. The problem with Mantle is that his peak was so short compared to the top 6-8 all time OFs we’ve been talking about in this thread.
  6. Brock Beauchamp
    Not that this is the defining way to approach this but if you go strictly by rWAR (subtracting Ruth's pitching WAR), the all-time leading OF is: 1. Bonds 2. Ruth 3. Mays 4. Cobb 5. Aaron 6. Speaker The wild card here is Williams, who missed three full seasons and two partial seasons to military service. Just eyeballing it and giving him full credit for roughly four seasons based on his numbers the surrounding seasons, he would finish around: 167 WAR Crazy. That would propel him all the way to first place on the all-time OF rWAR list, edging out Bonds by a couple of wins. He lost over 40 wins due to military service. But if we're granting Williams those seasons, we should also grant Ruth some extra wins to compensate for time "wasted" as a pitcher. That would easily jump him back up into at least the 170s in career wins above replacement, once again over Williams.
  7. Brock Beauchamp
    There are certainly questions whether Maeda can keep it up and in what capacity but Dodgers fans saw a very different version of Maeda than we saw last season. Their opinions aren't really relevant to the 2020 version of the pitcher. For example, his K% went up a whopping 5% while going from the NL to AL, where he faced a DH instead of a pitcher 11% of the time. His peripherals improved across the board, which isn't an accident. His K% was such an improvement that it launched him all the way to eighth out of all qualifying pitchers in baseball. I expect to see some kind of regression Maeda but have no idea the extent of that regression. The numbers back up him being a much better pitcher going forward, I just don't expect him to maintain "second in Cy voting" good.
  8. Brock Beauchamp
    The 2020 version of Maeda fits into 30 MLB rotations. The Twins changed his approach and he took a huge step forward last season. The question is whether that is sustainable and in what capacity but had the Dodgers controlled a version of Maeda that good, there's a zero percent chance they deal him for as little as they did. The guy finished second in Cy Young voting, for crying out loud. Let's not downplay how good he was or suggest 29 other teams wouldn't love to have him.
  9. Brock Beauchamp
    The market for declining former utility-but-not-really-good-enough-to-be-utility-anymore players is red hot. The Twins have to publicly announce their interest in Marwin while they silently negotiate a six year deal for Bauer.
  10. Brock Beauchamp
    It has been a brutal 12 months for Cooperstown.
  11. Brock Beauchamp
    The Twins will need, at minimum, seven starters this season, probably more like 8-9 over 140+ games or whatever they end up playing. Relying on the minors for slots #4-9 is a good way to ensure a losing season. The kids will get their shots either way but it’s bad planning to rely heavily on them from day one.
  12. Brock Beauchamp
    As a second move, this is fine. Happ is decent enough. If this is their starting pitching move, ick.
  13. Brock Beauchamp
    That's fine, I guess. He's a decent enough pitcher but I'm certainly not falling out of my chair with excitement.
  14. Brock Beauchamp
    No thanks.
  15. Brock Beauchamp
    Yeah, and it's particularly difficult to suffer through given the previous season and the upcoming uncertainty. It has been 11 months since we experienced anything resembling the typical cycle of a baseball calendar year.
  16. Brock Beauchamp
    I understand the offseason isn't even close to over but the White Sox have drastically improved while the Twins have done nothing. Not awesome thus far.
  17. Brock Beauchamp
    Both parties do not share equal liability, as the MLBPA has no power to instigate a rules change outside of negotiating it into the CBA. Only owners (MLB) have the ability to propose a rules change.
  18. Brock Beauchamp
    In case you missed my previous post that's literally five-ish posts above this: "I really don't understand how anyone could look at this situation and be angry at anyone other than the owners. This entire mess is their fault because they had two legitimate options that wouldn't damage the game as teams prepare for a season: 1. Don't do anything, wait until next offseason's CBA negotiations 2. Declare rule changes promptly and, for the love of god, don't try to bargain for that pound of flesh from the MLBPA into January and February"
  19. Brock Beauchamp
    Bolded: has anyone here actually argued that the word Indian is racist? I mean, opinion is pretty divided on it, and for good reason, but I haven't heard anyone arguing the legitimacy of the word itself. Maybe I missed it. But as I mentioned earlier, usage of the word itself and naming a baseball team after a living culture are wildly different conversations. You're conflating the two and that simply isn't right. I have no real opinion on the word itself but I think we're long past the time of naming sports teams after living cultures, especially ones with wildly racist imagery attached to them. Maybe if Cleveland removed the horrific Chief Wahoo 20 years ago, much of this dies out and the team remains called the Indians. But they didn't, and they deserve a hell of a lot of flak for holding onto that logo for so long. Perhaps things would be different had they cut that tumor out of the organization before the wave crashed down on them. The rest: This is going to sound dismissive, and it kind of is, but... "well, duh" is my response. Nobody here is claiming that Cleveland changing their name is a silver bullet and that's a really lazy argument to make when we're talking specifically about the sports team and its nickname. No one here is arguing for or against sweeping reforms to revitalize American indigenous communities (as that would violate political conversation rules on the site) so bringing it into this conversation is yet another case of whataboutism, which already garnered a warning from squirrel in this thread.
  20. Brock Beauchamp
    It's not an easy decision. Personally, I'd prefer to see the Twins aim higher and go for more of a sure thing but I'm also okay with bringing back Jake.
  21. Brock Beauchamp
    In essence, you're arguing for strict majority rule, which is kinda what got us into some of the biggest messes this country has faced since its inception. There is little to no danger in respecting the wishes of a minority populace, and most of your point doesn't hold weight because no one is actually forcing the Cleveland baseball team to do anything. The pendulum of public opinion has increasingly disliked the use of indigenous people as mascots for the past few decades - and for good reason, in my opinion - and the private sector is responding because they see it ultimately hurting their bottom line in the long run.
  22. Brock Beauchamp
    Except the owners are the ones dallying with a rule change at all... in the middle of a pandemic with loads of uncertainty. Oh, and let's not forget that they *also* haven't established a playoff format, roster size, or a host of other important things... and we're all of six weeks from pitchers and catchers reporting. I really don't understand how anyone could look at this situation and be angry at anyone other than the owners. This entire mess is their fault because they had two legitimate options that wouldn't damage the game as teams prepare for a season: 1. Don't do anything, wait until next offseason's CBA negotiations 2. Declare rule changes promptly and, for the love of god, don't try to bargain for that pound of flesh from the MLBPA into January and February Instead, we're getting... this. Again. Just like last season when I think first pitch of the season had already taken place when MLB announced postseason expansion. I mean, come on. Who defends this garbage?
  23. Brock Beauchamp
    How are both sides accountable for this? The MLBPA would agree to it in a heartbeat, it’s the owners that keep shifting and being nebulous about it. Again, if the owners want to use the DH as a negotiating chip, the time and place to do that is the upcoming CBA negotiations, not the middle of some random offseason.
  24. Brock Beauchamp
    Actually, I think everybody wants a universal DH, which makes this even worse. The only thing holding back owners is that adding a universal DH will cost money and owners won't agree to anything that costs money until they extract a pound of flesh from the players in return. Which is why we've ended up in these terrible situations time and time again, almost always to the detriment of the game itself. The players are far from guilt-free but it's the owners that always seem eager to burn down the game tomorrow if it makes them a buck today. History is not going to be kind to Rob Manfred's tenure as commissioner. If owners want to use the DH for leverage, there's a time and place to do that: the next CBA negotiations. The time and place isn't in the middle of a pandemic, blowing hot and cold on a daily basis about a fundamental rule of the game as teams try to prepare for a new season.
  25. Brock Beauchamp
    As mentioned earlier, I don't mind the Rays trading Snell or any other single player in their organization. It's about need, not want. But look at the Rays' payroll. I guarantee you that out of the many players they've traded over the past decade, they wanted to keep some of those players but could not for financial reasons. Baseball would be better if teams like the Rays, through revenue sharing and obligation (carrot and stick), were forced to maintain a more competitive payroll comparative to the league. That means teams like the Rays, Pirates, As, etc., would receive sharing to increase their payroll but also create a floor no team can drop below, say $90-100m. Add a draft lottery (or similar mechanism) and you'd all but kill intentional 2-3 year tanking, which is becoming a big problem in the sport to the detriment of fans and interest. More equity between payrolls will make for a better game overall. The Rays can and should operate by shuffling players to keep open a competitive window but that shouldn't be a strategy they're forced to employ because they can't afford to keep even their modestly-paid players.
×
×
  • Create New...