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
-
There's a big difference between having potential value on the roster and paying for potential value. It costs the Twins nothing but a roster spot to see what happens with Santana. Giving up something of value to acquire him is an entirely different argument. Hell, even Terry Ryan - Santana's own GM - went out of his way to point out that Santana was going to regress and we can't expect him to repeat his 2014 season. How often does a GM say something like that? How often does Terry Ryan say something like that? My vote goes to "I've never heard him say anything like that before". Sure, maybe I overstated my case. It's entirely possible Danny Santana would have brought back a middling low-A prospect with a smidgeon of upside. Yippee. Any offer for Santana was going to be based on something approaching a worst-case scenario because he was such an outlier in 2014 and no GM in their right mind was going to give up anything worth mentioning. Sure, that player might technically have "value" but he probably wouldn't even slot into the top 20 Twins prospects as of a year ago (when the system was loaded) so who cares? Again... My point is that if the core of an argument requires another GM to be a complete buffoon, the argument is invalid. This should be common sense yet it's anything but common around here some days.
-
There's a documentary on drone strikes? Thanks for the heads-up. It's one of the more woefully under-discussed topics of the day.
-
Because he has potential value to the Twins. He's a big question mark. Teams don't pay for big question marks. Every. Single. One. Of. Us. Looked at Santana's 2014 numbers and said "2015 could be really ugly... I hope it's not, but it has the potential to be really ugly." Yet some of the same people speak out of the other side of their mouth and say "Ryan should have traded him when his value "peaked". It's nonsensical. Like I said earlier, if your argument is predicated on the opposing GM being mentally impaired, the argument sucks.
-
1. If you have four outfield prospects and three of them turn into reliable starters, that's a huge win. Don't assume all four players will become viable MLB starters. 2. The Royals look good after the Myers trade but some of that is due to dumb luck. Myers was never injured in the minors and has been nothing but injured since coming to MLB. That's not the sort of thing a team can predict with any kind of accuracy.
-
I'd be shocked if Santana didn't get a fair number of infield innings in 2016.
-
The gaping hole in this train of thought is "If you see giant red flags of potential regression, so do opposing GMs." If your complaint about Ryan is predicated on other GMs having an IQ under 70 and not understanding the game of baseball, your argument is probably flawed. No one was going to offer value for a rookie with a MiLB OPS around .700 and a MLB BABIP over .400. No one. Not even Arizona.
-
Joe Mauer Is "Much Stronger" Than Past Seasons
Brock Beauchamp replied to Parker Hageman's topic in Minnesota Twins Talk
Terry Ryan himself has commented on Perkins' training, or lack thereof. That opens the door for a real examination how Glen goes about his business. From the Twins Daily Offseason Handbook: No one in a position of knowledge has ever questioned Mauer's work ethic. It baffles me how people can believe a guy who spent his prime as the best contact hitter in all of baseball - one of the top ten catchers of all time - is... Lazy. One doesn't become the best all-around player in the world (as Joe was in 2009) on accident. Sheer talent cannot catapault a person to the top of their field. Only hard work and dedication can boost an already-talented person to the top. That doesn't free Mauer from all criticism but it does mean a person needs more than anecdotal quotes and a heaping of speculation to assert their position with any kind of certainty.- 99 replies
-
- 4
-
-
- joe mauer
- roger erickson
- (and 2 more)
-
I still believe there's a solid future for Santana as a futility guy... Kind of a "Ben Zobrist without the bat" type player. You know, basically Denny Hocking. If he can shore up his defensive play at SS and hit somewhere near league average, that's a guy I want on my team all day long. He has the potential to be all things to the team: defensive sub all over the field (if he figures out SS, I'd work him at 2B as well), won't embarrass himself with the bat, and crazy-speed as a pinch-runner in late innings. The kid is only entering his age 25 season. There's plenty of room to grow into a useful piece. I'd like to see the Twins hold on to Santana all year and then rotate him into super-sub status in 2017, taking Nunez's spot on the roster.
-
Laudner killed it. I laughed when so few "sabermatriciansians" raised their hands (even though when called on, I was off on Blyleven's total strikeouts by 200).
-
Hah! Trust me, there is *nothing* sexy about that documentary... Provided you have a conscience.
-
I hope that doesn't happen but damn, that'd be a spectacle.
-
I've been saying the same thing for years.
-
Gaming is getting bigger but I don't think it's in ways that will benefit Nvidia in a positive way. The companies that stand to profit the most from gaming expansion are Google and Apple, provided they get their **** together. Smartphones destroyed the handheld gaming market and at the rate SoC chips are advancing, the same could happen to the console market in the next half decade. I predict the future of gaming is to be found on $150 set-top boxes, not dedicated consoles and PCs where Nvidia makes most of their money. Not only are consoles closed and expensive, developers who can use the power found within are becoming fewer and fewer by the day. In a market where it takes $10m to produce a game that draws customer attention, the risk of failure is too high for independent studios. Hell, even the big studios are tightening their belts because one big failure could cripple their business. Nvidia themselves see this wave - which is why they created Shield in the first place - but I suspect they're going to become just one more option in an increasingly crowded Android space while Google rakes in money hand over fist.
-
Plouffe and the Mid Market Payroll
Brock Beauchamp replied to Platoon's topic in Minnesota Twins Talk
The Frazier trade is more proof of my point than it is yours. Most of the analysis of the Frazier deal hovered between "meh" and "ugh" from the Reds' perspective. This was *not* a good market for third baseman. Frazier had a combined 9.3 WAR over the past two seasons and failed to bring back a great prospect. That's when you hunker down and wait out the market, you don't just trade a guy for the sake of making a trade. -
Plouffe and the Mid Market Payroll
Brock Beauchamp replied to Platoon's topic in Minnesota Twins Talk
Don't confuse me not being upset about Plouffe being on the roster with approval of the current roster. This is not how I would have handled the offseason. Whether it's trading Plouffe or not picking up Park, I would have gone a different route. But that's only my opinion. I don't entirely like what Ryan has done this offseason but I don't hate it, either (not including the bullpen in this statement). It's... *shrugs* I'm "negatively neutral" on the offseason, I guess you could say. It's not how I would have done it but I can't get too riled up about it, either. -
Plouffe and the Mid Market Payroll
Brock Beauchamp replied to Platoon's topic in Minnesota Twins Talk
Given what other third basemen were getting on the market this offseason, it wasn't in the team's best interest to trade Plouffe. Trevor Plouffe is roughly a 2.5-3 WAR player, yet some around here are champing at the bit to trade him away for mid-level relief prospects. That's... Insane. -
Plouffe and the Mid Market Payroll
Brock Beauchamp replied to Platoon's topic in Minnesota Twins Talk
Switching a player's position *can* hurt their development but it's far from a given that it will. Miggy and Pujols are two obvious examples of players who weren't hurt a lick by shuffling them around the diamond. I don't get the fretting over Kepler. He had one very good breakout season that may have been BABIP-driven. I don't think it was but the guy needs a bit more development time and shouldn't be a consideration until June at the earliest. There's plenty of time to rearrange the roster if Kepler forces his way onto it. Right now, it's not even on my radar. -
True, there is that. I forgot they were into that market. Though I wonder how that market is going to play out once Google and Apple enter it in earnest (personally, I'm not in love with the idea of Apple entering that market at all, at least not from the manufacturing side of things and Apple is loathe to offer only a software solution for anything).
-
I'm surprised you guys like Nvidia. They've been under my radar because I don't like their long-term future (admittedly, at a glance). Third party GPUs are not going to be a long-term necessity as computing continues a slog toward SoC systems. They have a stake in SoC as well but I don't think it's a particularly strong presence against Qualcomm and Apple. I'm not sold on their hardware (Shield) or virtual reality, either (I think VR isn't going to pan out into much of a market, just as smartwatches aren't going to be a powerhouse market). But, again, this is at a glance. I haven't really examined their business in a long time.
-
I have a small stake in Disney partially because I wanted to increase my dividend stocks to balance my portfolio. I think we've seen the majority of Disney's growth in the short-term and whatever they're gaining in film, they're losing in ESPN. The stock is a mixed bag, IMO.
-
Yeah, this was a solid documentary. I watched it... Last year, maybe? It was awhile ago.
-
And that's fair. There is reason to be cautious with the stock. It's a super high-risk stock and will be for some time.
-
Prime is great but Amazon's video service is only available in a handful of countries and Amazon's ability to scale to those countries quickly is limited, as they offer *no* services to the overwhelming majority of the world. I like Amazon and I think they have a lot of potential but they're years behind Netflix and they can't scale quickly because they're a lot more than a streaming company. Before Video moves into a country (much less Prime itself), Amazon needs to lay the groundwork for shipping, books, and a host of other things. Netflix, on the other hand, has already started that expansion and they've done it aggressively. Prime might catch up in several years but there's a good chance it'll be too late to stop Netflix by that point (plus, Netflix's self-generated content is generally superior both in quality and quantity).
-
Interesting. I'm staying in Netflix because I like their long-term potential. They're well ahead of the game in the rest of the world and it's going to be tough for the rest of the industry to catch up to them outside the US. I think they'll continue to grow for quite some time (though their short-term losses will remain as they aggressively expand).
-
Yeah, their short-term valuation is bonkers. If I hadn't recently put money into high-risk shares of Fitbit (the market is needlessly down on them right now) and Square (they're a big risk but I like their 10+ year potential), I'd double-down on Apple. They seem to be a lock to gain back at least 10-15% once the market rights itself. My hope is Apple fights their recent downturn by upping their dividend yield. As someone who wants to move more to dividend stocks (I'm overly weighted in high-risk stocks right now), that'd be a lure to keep me in the stock long-term. God knows Apple has the profits and on-hand cash to do it.
