Jump to content
Our free agent ranking is up to 100 names, and now you can filter by player position! Click here to check it out! ×
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

Brock Beauchamp

Site Manager
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    32,662

  • 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
    And that's possible. My point is that complaining about not acquiring players individually ignores that we just don't know what goes on behind closed doors. That's why I tend to look at offseasons as a big picture. I didn't care if the Twins picked up Nolasco, Hughes, Garza, Jimenez, or Santana. I don't know which ones were willing to come to Minnesota for what price. The Twins needed better pitchers and Ryan acquired two decent arms. I'm cool with that. The same thinking applied to last offseason and Ryan failed to acquire good pitching. I didn't care who he got but they needed to be better than Pelfrey (Corriea actually turned out okay). Either way, Ryan failed to meet expectations last offseason and succeeded this offseason. The names don't matter that much to me. Sure, I prefer some players over others but since I'm not there for negotiations, I won't howl if things don't go exactly how I like.
  2. Brock Beauchamp
    Yikes. Again, I wonder about those medical reports. Teams must know something that we don't because on paper, Garza is worth more than Nolasco despite Matt's past two seasons.
  3. Brock Beauchamp
    Oh, I wasn't disagreeing with your point, just snarking a bit.
  4. Brock Beauchamp
    Anthony Swarzak is typing a sternly worded letter of dissent right now.
  5. Brock Beauchamp
    While I believe that most players follow dollars and years, assuming that a single player will go anywhere based solely on money is a mistake. For all we know, Matt Garza has a Ron Gardenhire dartboard. He might not like the fact that the 35 has both a W and E version. Last time he went to Matt's Bar, there may have been a hair in his burger. He might think Minnie and Paul's handshaking relationship is a little too effeminate for his conservative viewpoint. In short, we just don't know. A player's decision could literally be based on anything.
  6. Brock Beauchamp
    Could be an aberration. Look at his spray chart... It doesn't look to me like Fenway did him any favors. http://pitchfx.texasleaguers.com/batter/452220/
  7. Brock Beauchamp
    Fair enough... I guess it all comes down to whether 2014-2017 Nolasco looks more like 2013 Nolasco (league average despite being rather unlucky) or 2010-2012 Nolasco (not a very good pitcher). Did he figure something out? Did he just hate Miami? Was 2013 a lucky aberration, despite his peripherals suggesting he was better than his numbers? I guess we'll find out soon enough.
  8. Brock Beauchamp
    Absolutely. I only used three years because that's what I think it will take to get him. If he's on board for two years, I'd give him more per year, definitely. Well, it depends... If you mean he won't repeat last year's success because of injuries and/or dropoff, then that's definitely a consideration. If you mean he won't repeat last year's success because of Fenway Park, that shouldn't be an issue... Drew had almost zero opposite field power last season which means that Fenway was a burden to him, not a boon.
  9. Brock Beauchamp
    Eh, hard to say. Garza hasn't been durable the past two years while Nolasco has been durable over the past three seasons. Of course, past injuries don't automatically mean future injuries will occur and all that but at the end of the day, I think Nolasco has a decent shot of being the better signing. Not 50/50 by any means but the two pitchers just aren't that far apart in talent/age/stuff when you get right down to it. Garza has an advantage in stuff (but really, his stuff hasn't been great the past two seasons) but Nolasco might have the edge in durability, as much as one can predict such a thing.
  10. Brock Beauchamp
    For me, the ceiling on Drew is 3/$36m. I wouldn't consider him at a nickel above that price and I'm not sure I would even sign him at that price. But if the price drops to 3/$30m or under, I'd strongly consider him at that point.
  11. Brock Beauchamp
    I can't get over this price. It really makes me wonder what Garza's medical reports look like because I can't fathom how a 30 year old pitcher of his quality only gets 4/$52m in this market.
  12. Brock Beauchamp
    I know this isn't your stance, Parker, or at least it probably isn't your stance but I find this argument to be untenable upon examination. The bird in the hand is worth two in the bush and all that. The Twins have been burned in recent years by "waiting the market out" on pitchers and ended up scrounging junk off the pile because of it (well, that and dollars and years). There was no reason to expect Tanaka to hold the entire market hostage for two months. There was no reason to expect teams to shy away from Garza for as long as they did. Would I prefer Garza over Nolasco at the same price? Sure, I think that's pretty obvious... But if you're Terry Ryan in November, you can't bank on either Nolasco or Garza being available in late January or you're going to get burned on the free agent market almost every season if you wait it out and hope "your guy" is still available. You go get the guy you want at the price you're willing to pay. It's as simple as that. If there are "leftovers" at the end of the offseason, sure, you reevaluate at that time but don't delay your offseason plans in hopes that a guy will float in limbo for two months and that it will drive down the price... Because that's a pretty rare occurrence and can't be reliably predicted (or every team would employ this strategy every offseason).
  13. Brock Beauchamp
    Wow. That's a pretty sweet deal for the Brew Crew.
  14. Brock Beauchamp
    The Twins have not lost a major free agent they wanted to retain since coming to Target Field. In fact, the Twins have retained most of the free agents they wanted to keep during their Metrodome years, too. Hunter and Santana were the two big losses but are more than offset by the retention of guys like Radke, Morneau, and Mauer. The Twins are not, and never have been, the Oakland Athletics or Tampa Bay Rays. Those teams struggle to retain any of their free agents. That's not a problem the Twins have faced in the past 15 years. The Twins can't keep all of their free agents, sure... But they don't lose virtually every one like the A's and Rays have over the years.
  15. Brock Beauchamp
    It's not about being afraid to make a mistake, it's about taking on unnecessary risks that involve too many variables to predict an outcome with any kind of accuracy. The Florida Marlins don't intentionally sign FAs to trade them, they have one of the worst owners in sports who liquidates his team whenever he fears his profits might dip below an acceptable level. Big difference there. The Marlins don't use FA trades to build their team, they fire sale players. As for Fielder, that was a rare move that involved a ton of moving pieces. Like I said: There's a reason why no team uses this strategy consistently. There's a big difference between "this never happens" versus "no one uses this strategy on a regular basis".
  16. Brock Beauchamp
  17. Brock Beauchamp
    What happens if you run out of bullets? What happens if the Twins need a left fielder and shortstop in 2015 but only have $14m to spend? You're not going to fill all those holes, particularly if the holes are unexpected (say, if Arcia gets injured or falls on his face in 2014). Which is a fine strategy on paper... Except that trades don't happen on paper. For a myriad of reasons, it's very difficult to trade a large free agent contract just one year into the player's multi-year deal. Maybe the player gets injured. Maybe his performance is flat and teams aren't willing to take on the money. Maybe the teams that need him don't have the prospects to make the deal happen. Maybe a GM balks at a team trading a good free agent for apparently no reason and won't offer anything of value. Maybe your team gets a reputation for flipping free agents and after a season or two, every free agent you try to sign demands a no-trade clause or they sign with another team. Can you trade a free agent after a year in theory? Sure you can. But can you guarantee that you'll be able to move that player after a season? Absolutely not. It's an incredibly risky strategy and one that could burn a team badly if it fails. There's a reason why no team uses this strategy consistently. Not one. You sign the players you want on your team for the length of years you want them. Don't try to get cute with complex machinations based on multiple variables.
  18. Brock Beauchamp
    Yeah, but you have to let the kids play... You can't fill up the roster with free agents blocking them from getting the required MLB experience to succeed. Which is why I think Drew is the only viable FA for the Twins left on the market... But even he has some pretty ugly warts and isn't a perfect fit. I think he's a decent gamble but I can also see why others don't feel the same. As for Tanaka, I'm firing from the hip here but I'm almost positive this statement is true: No team in MLB history has won a championship with two players consuming 50% of payroll. Zero. None. Nada. Zilch. At $20m+ per season, Tanaka has all sorts of red flags surrounding him and almost no upside. Not at that price. The Twins won't win with one 5 win player being paid $20m+ a season... They already have that in Joe Mauer. They need a bunch of 2-3 win players before they're competitive again.
  19. Brock Beauchamp
    This is how prospects come to the major leagues. I don't understand the stance of "Rush these prospects, I want to see them learn at the MLB level!" and after they stumble a bit and struggle to adjust to the highest level of competition, talking about how miserable a prospect they were in the first place. Prospects struggle at the MLB level. It's how it works. Some guys need to go back to the minors, find their footing, and then come back with improved ability to compete. A few players who struggled mightily in the first MLB experience: Torii Hunter Justin Morneau Michael Cuddyer Jason Kubel Johan Santana (admittedly, he had no business being on an MLB roster but had to be on it) Brad Radke Cristian Guzman Hey, look at that. Almost the entire core of the 2000s playoff teams needed to go back to the minors or struggled horrifically in their first MLB season.
  20. Brock Beauchamp
    Which is pretty amazing when you adjust expectations for the Twins' farm system after removing Hicks, Gibson, and Arcia from "prospect" status. All three were top 100 prospects last season in most rankings. Removing three top 100 prospects and remaining the consensus #1 farm system (maybe #2 on a couple of fringe lists) is quite a feat.
  21. Brock Beauchamp
    I don't know if that's true at all. From what I've read of NPB, it has a smattering of MLB-quality players, several more AAA/AAAA guys, and a slew of guys who would struggle to round out a AA roster. In short, their talent level is all over the place. And yeah, Tanaka might be the #1 prospect in MLB and he might be worth tens of millions of dollars... Except the Yankees didn't give him tens of millions. They gave him $150 million. That's Ervin Santana and Matt Garza. What would you rather have, Tanaka or Santana/Garza? There is a ton of downside with Tanaka and not much upside when he's paid like Zack Greinke without the experience of Zack Greinke.
  22. Brock Beauchamp
    So the Twins should dedicate 25% of their payroll to a guy who hasn't pitched an MLB game and whose arm has been abused in NPB? I do not, and never will, understand the argument of "if you have the money, spend it... doesn't matter if it's foolishly or not".
  23. Brock Beauchamp
    Reboulet didn't have that je ne sais quoi that I look for in my no-hit latin shortstops that once had a decent glove but have aged and no longer belong within 50 yards of a major league roster.
  24. Brock Beauchamp
    Let's not forget the worth Cano brings off the field in New York, as Pseudo just mentioned. He has been the best player and the face of the franchise over the past several seasons as the rest of the team aged into mediocrity or retired. Outside of McCann, I can't understand what the Yankees are thinking but as a fan of another team, I think it's great because they've really worked hard on saddling themselves with albatross contracts this offseason.
  25. Brock Beauchamp
    They're becoming more common. The opt-out makes a bad deal even worse for the Yankees. Tanaka is completely unproven. He could be Hideo Nomo as easily (or more easily, probably) than he could be Yu Darvish. And if he becomes Yu Darvish? He gets to opt out after four seasons and play the field as a 28-29 year old. Just a terrible deal all around for the Yankees.
×
×
  • Create New...