Brock Beauchamp
-
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
-
We’ve been fixated on 60s-70s folk and country lately. I suppose that if I’m going to watch the world burn, may as well just sit back while James Taylor sings the soundtrack.
-
1. Buxton (okay, bad idea but whatever) 2. Arraez (I'm starting to wonder what the hell is happening, is Gardenhire running this team, except Arraez can get on base so I'm doubly confused because 'play second, bat second' only really works if the player is terrible, which Arraez is not) 3. Kepler (what?) 4. Sano (yeah, okay, cool) 5. Cruz (yeah, okay, cool, should be third) 6. Garver (okay, you betcha) 7. Polanco (yeah, whatever) 8. Rosario (not doing a great job of L/R splits but okay) 9. Donaldson (SERIOUSLY ARE YOU ****ING TROLLING US) -
This is an excellent primer everyone should watch.
-
Something I noticed about Mauer awhile back to illustrate just how much his career was altered by the concussion: After the concussion, he played 660 games for a .746 OPS and accumulated 10.7 rWAR. In 2013-14 after "bilateral leg weakness", he played 260 games for an .870 OPS and accumulated 10.0 rWAR. It's hard to call Mauer underrated and maybe he isn't outside Minnesota... but he is the best Twin to don a uniform since possibly Carew, maybe Puckett depending how you frame your opinion. He is a top ten catcher in history through his prime years and then he took a shot to the head and it all went to hell. But for those 7-8 years, he was as good as it gets behind the plate.
- 49 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- joe mauer
- brad radke
- (and 2 more)
-
I’m a big fan of the largest, peaceful border in history suddenly being... not.
-
Has there been any movement on the question of whether this thing can recur in the same person? I know that was a question last week but haven't heard anything since.
-
I actually haven't addressed diehard's opinions about the economy at all. I disagree with his opinions but they're just that, opinions. I only challenged his repeated assertions that flattening the curve will not change the mortality rate. As we've seen in South Korea versus Italy/Spain, flattening the curve is vitally important and pretty much every person worth listening to on the subject agrees.
-
I like what Walz did here in Minnesota. He outlined a clear five week plan of shelter in place for two weeks, then three weeks of social distancing and did it based on the numbers. He didn't knee-jerk himself into a bad decision, he listened to people who understood the numbers and acted with a calm, cool hand. Of course, that's easier to do when your state's citizenship is naturally inclined to keep to themselves and no part of the state has a high urban density. We need a lot more of that kind of clarity in our leaders right now. Unfortunately, we're not getting enough of it. I'm open to whatever plan works and has the data to support it but some parts of this country needed to be preparing for this two months ago, not two weeks ago. Everybody understood New York didn't stand a chance fighting this thing because of their public transport and high urban density, yet NOW they're scrambling for ventilators.
-
Then what's the point of anything? You know what, let's just redirect everything to the Epoch Times and call it a day. All opinions are not created equally and factually incorrect information should be aggressively challenged because it's literally putting people in danger. I don't care if there are millions of people repeating falsehoods elsewhere on the internet, I can't control that. But I can control it here and in a situation as dire as this one, I'm damned well going to do what I can to stop the spread of misinformation. If anyone wants to read the opinions of people who actually matter, here's a good list. https://www.ucl.ac.uk/oppenheim/Covid-19_tweeps.shtml?fbclid=IwAR0mO-DoFp5UY9m7DQgXD7bGXhVamx6lWokqMs6laleuo7ZDZCtjuqQqWYs
-
https://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/ny-covid-19-cases-doubling-every-3-days-feds-say-self-quarantine-after-visit-to-nyc/2343128/?fbclid=IwAR1Qo7ko1LJl6841i6f_YRL4-aaxu0MtHFWcDML_hDUUluFJMl2_xHsmpvg New York deaths double in 36 hours. "Our single greatest challenge is ventilators," Gov. Andrew Cuomo says. "We have 11,000. We need 30,000"
-
Literally not what you said, diehard. Own your statements and retract them. "Corona is, in terms of kill rate, is not even as dangerous as the flu." "It's not an issue of choosing who does and doesn't go. This is natural selection. This virus is going to kill who it's going to kill and there's literally nothing we can do about it. Flattening the curve isn't going to change the mortality rate." "You can flatten the curve, but that will put very little dent in the mortality rate." "Flattening the curve is about lowering the rate of exposure. You may save a life or two here or there because medical providers will be better equipped to keep up, but that virus is still going to kill at its kill rate..." Every one of these statements is factually untrue.
-
The numbers are undeniable and almost every medical expert is telling us the same thing: ease the curve and fewer people die. Ventilators and the necessary ICU machinery are not readily available to cure every person sick with the same disease because of course they're not. Never in modern medical history has a single disease come on this strongly with the same necessary medical machinery needed to ease the mortality rate. We've built a capitalistic system that serves predicted need, not emergency need. I'm not even saying that's bad, I'm merely saying we only build and sell the machines we need under typical circumstances. These are not typical circumstances and that means we have fewer medical facilities than needed. Let's put it in more numerical terms. Say a single metro area has 100 ventilators, respirators, or whatever equipment is needed to keep the mortality low on COVID-19. Until that metro reaches 100 ICU patients with COVID-19 simultaneously, the mortality rate stays pretty low depending on age and personal circumstance, probably in the range of 1-2%. That 101st patient has, if not a 100% mortality rate, close to it. As does every patient after that 101st patient. The mortality rate can go from 1, 2, 4% to 90% in a real hurry under your ugly Social Darwinism system. We are not an anti-science forum, please respect that.
-
I've been watching the 91 series because it was just so phenomenal. Perhaps the most underrated series in all of baseball history. No one talks about it but five (!!!!!) games decided by one run, three in extra innings, including the final two. How does a series get better than that?
-
Or tearing through the Heartland, robbing banks and staying one step ahead of the law.
-
Or maybe this will be more succinct: https://www.cbssports.com/nba/news/coronavirus-infected-jazz-star-rudy-gobert-issues-apology-to-the-people-that-i-have-endangered/ "Infected Jazz star Rudy Gobert issues apology 'to the people that I have endangered'" The dude walked around and licked microphones to show how NOT big of a deal this is. Well, that sure worked out, just as your opinion will surely work out as well. The entire NBA had to shut down because of what he did, which tells you how this all works.
-
Did it occur to you that viruses spread from contact and that maybe where you live isn't yet susceptible to community transmission? But a baseball player moves all around the country, touching and talking to people everywhere. Maybe your kids' school and a sports league are different somehow. Just maybe.
-
What bothers me about this line of thinking is two-fold: 1. First, it's half-complete, at best. COVID-19 appears to attack people over 70 with a ferocity the flu cannot match, though thankfully it also appears to do little to childen. 2. We don't lock down countries for the flu for a reason: because it simply WON'T get that bad most of the time if left to spread through the population normally. As we saw in Wuhan and later Italy and Iran, taking a laissez-faire attitude with COVID-19 leads to disastrous results. But if we take (sometimes severe) precautions and thwart this thing from blowing up in our faces, nay-sayers will jeer and say "see, nothing to worry about here". Literally the only way to convince statements like the above quoted is to let things go to hell in a handbasket and then wag our finger to show them how wrong they were. Not a great solution. I'll err on the side of caution here, considering what we've seen for those regions of the world who did not (and, inversely, the almost non-existent effects of those that did such as South Korea and Taiwan). This is a pretty irresponsible take, diehard.
-
Before anyone crowns Moncada the next coming, it needs to be noted he had a .406 BABIP last season. He’s certainly a *very* nice player but he’s going to need to keep growing as a hitter to compensate for the inevitable BABIP normalization, which will significantly drag down his future OPS. He can probably compensate somewhat but we shouldn’t be looking at his triple slash and assuming it will only rise in the future.
-
Ugh, not true. The media today will throw any downplaying a manager says in their face if the reality doesn't match the statement. Unfortunately for all of us, baseball managers and front offices are held to a much higher standard than politicians.
-
The Moncada deal is interesting and one I'd sign in a heartbeat but the Kepler and Polanco deals are outright steals in comparison. Moncada might be the better player in the long run (probably likely) but getting two players for 50% more who are likely to be MLB starters and have pretty big upside themselves is a big get.
-
Is Luis Arraez Really Just Ben Revere?
Brock Beauchamp replied to Ted Schwerzler 's topic in Twins Daily Front Page News
Well... I guess? But the thing is that Arraez actually hits the ball hard, which is a pretty big indicator of hitting well. And notice the Twins, one of the more advanced front offices nowadays, didn't try to change him at all and had him jump the line over several players at a very young age. They easily could have called up a few other players but chose Luis over all of them. -
I don't think there are any discussions at this point because the two sides would be so wildly far apart. Buxton needs a good season for contract leverage, the team is willing to pay for what he has done (plus some, but almost certainly not enough).
-
Is Luis Arraez Really Just Ben Revere?
Brock Beauchamp replied to Ted Schwerzler 's topic in Twins Daily Front Page News
You're really misinterpreting what StatCast tries to tell us if you think guys who hit the ball and hit it hard (but maybe not enough to fence it) aren't getting a shot at the big leagues. The thing is that guys like Revere (not Arraez) don't make the big leagues nowadays because of their launch angle or, more likely, they have it fixed before they hit even hit MLB and are therefore successful. StatCast doesn't hate these guys, it hates bad contact and bad launch angle because defenses are so attuned to groundball contact nowadays. -
Good Lord, I would trade Buxton for Syndergaard in a heartbeat and I freakin' love Buxton. I salivate at what Johnson and the Twins development team could do with Syndergaard. Mets pitchers, while good, are generally regarded as being underdeveloped and underutilized. Which is a big reason why teams were basically in a fistfight to throw money at Wheeler this offseason. Syndergaard pushes this team into a World Series contender, on par with the Yankees or Dodgers or Astros.
-
Baseball history is littered with workhorses who suddenly became injury-prone... and also the inverse. Buxton's injury history is certainly troublesome but it doesn't mean he will continue to injure himself every season. Or it might mean he continues to injure himself every season. There isn't a great predictive model for this kind of thing.
