Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

jkcarew

Verified Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    5,576

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    6

 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 jkcarew

  1. jkcarew
    Agree with the concept. Those trades were examples of good Terry Ryan. Not only because he was 'proactive' in looking for the opportunities, and got good (really great) value for Kielty and Buchanan....but because they made the correct choices in which pieces of the depth to trade vs keep. Bad Terry, proactively traded Hicks because he was sure about Buxton. Might want to be 'more sure' (at least AA sure?) about Kiriloff before we part ways with any of the major league pieces.
  2. jkcarew
    The other challenge is that he's a corner outfielder who's slugging .370 in 57 games at Rochester. For context, with the Twins this year: Grossman .365, Morrison .368, Adrianza .380, Mauer .358. Also, both Kepler and Cave are OPS'ing with the Twins better than Wade is with Rochester. I definitely don't want Wade not playing every day right now...so fine with him finishing the Rochester season. Would like to see him in September...but don't know if the roster math will make that practical.
  3. jkcarew
    But the IF in that last paragraph is a pretty significant if where we sit today...and that’s what the ‘life of luxury’ money is dependent on. And if he’s not, he’s out of baseball or a AAAA player. I’m not sure his camp wouldn’t be willing to look at relatively friendly extensions...maybe sooner rather than later. Turning it around...what IF his 2019 resembles in any way his 2018 either in health or performance?
  4. jkcarew
    I guess the question is, how many major-league at-bats do you sacrifice to get the extra year of control? For my money, I wouldn't be willing to sacrifice many at all. Buxton doesn't know how to hit major league pitching, and until that is figured out, the extra year of control doesn't have much value. First things first. He needs reps at hitting. After that, he needs more reps at hitting. And I'll hope that we even care about his service time down the road.
  5. jkcarew
    Agree that you can win championships with solidly/consistently average players...even at several positions. Also, I do think Max can be better than solidly average...but how much better is what is at the heart of this article. One of the central themes of the article (and an article that proceeded it) is that Max has been 'unlucky' with regard to batted-ball results. And that we could expect better results in the future based both on real (for lack of a better term) improvements he is making...but also based on his batted ball luck normalizing. I'm disagreeing with the later, is all. At 1500 career plate appearances, his BABiP has already 'normalized'...and it's a low number.
  6. jkcarew
    This article was written in the middle of the last/most recent road trip. On that road trip, Kepler posted a BABiP of .056 (1 for 18). If Max were to get 6 hits on his next 6 balls-in-play, he'd still be below (for the recent stretch) the 'normal' that is being suggested here as Kepler's inevitable destiny. OK...1 for 18 is bad luck. But, the idea that all batters will tend toward a .300 BABiP is a false narrative. Max's batter ball profile will need to change to get to the optimistic end of our hopes.
  7. jkcarew
    The advantage of identifying the tell is partly off-set by the fact that the batter, in looking for the tell, is compromising his focus/view of the release point.
  8. jkcarew
    This is not a crazy idea. But then, you're suggesting that, this off-season, the Twins sign two left-handed bats that can only play (from a practical standpoint) 1B. Because if they don't sign Joe, but sign Murphy to play 1B/DH...the governor will have to call in the National Guard.
  9. jkcarew
    I don't think anyone has been 'joyful'...at least regarding what this means for the Twins. But, I think one can be a bit joyful for the player, separating what it means for the Twins. Wasn't Stewart's fault he was drafted 4th and offered $4 1/2 million to sign. He could have given up...the 4.5 has been in his pocket for some time. But, he's been a grinder. Maybe an unlikely grinder...but a grinder nonetheless. So, I'm happy for him. We'll see what the future holds.
  10. jkcarew
    But most of those reasons (to go somewhere other than Rodney) all existed when they originally signed him, IMO. Doesn't matter. We agree that there are many legitimate reasons to trade Rodney at this point.
  11. jkcarew
    Agreed. It doesn't work like that. I will say the Rodney signing seems more and more strange in retrospect. If you liked him going into 2018, what don't you like about him going into 2019? Did they actually expect him to be better than he was? They shouldn't have. Seemed like a hedge signing at the time. "We'll get someone better at the deadline if we look to be serious contenders." To me, this trade is changing their mind...admitting mistakes. It's not like anyone else in the bullpen has stepped up to make Rodney redundant (at least yet). Although...I agree with the changing of the mind. Never like the signing in the first place.
  12. jkcarew
    Can't work up much of an opinion. Other than count me as one that did NOT think Rodney would fetch anything even remotely approaching a "near major-league ready" player. And he did need to be traded. So....lottery ticket.
  13. jkcarew
    otoh...Kimbrel's 4 blown saves came in 37 opportunities; Rodney's 6 in 31. So, that's actually pretty significant difference...and Kimbrel is no longer great. I know nobody wants to look at BS anymore...but the guys that blow them at a healthy clip never have the impressive underlying numbers either, as is/was the case with Rodney.
  14. jkcarew
    I'm also skeptical of the 'bad luck' theory in the case of Kepler. The data that drivelikejehu and JLease cite is just as real (and relevant) as the data called out in the article. Additionally, Max's hard-hit balls are distributed very predictably on the pull side. He's easy to defend. Having said that, he's improved on some aspects, and shows every sign of being the type of player that will continue to put in the work to continue to improve. That simple fact along with him still only in his age 25 season suggests that there will be plenty value there before it's all said and done.
  15. jkcarew
    Last night's home run was Rooker's first in about the last 9-10 games. But the things he needs to improve upon, keep improving. Encouraging. His on-base/walks continue to improve, and the K% continues to trend in the right direction. I agree, let's get him to AAA.
  16. jkcarew
    Good point. I never thought of it this way. We probably have 'certain long-tenured player' on a step-count.
  17. jkcarew
    I could not care less whether we win or lose these games. The W/L's at this point are less relevant than those of the minor league teams. I'm interested in seeing the individual performances of those that are likely to be in 2019 plans. To that end, I thought a few things were noteworthy. May looked encouraging. So did Sano. Two things happened in the 9th inning Sano at-bat that almost never happen with Sano. He was both looking for the breaking ball away ahead in the count...usually only looking FB in that situation...AND he seemed to consciously try to hit it to the right side of center. To me, he needs to take advantage of the low leverage games/at-bats remaining and keep working on this stuff and not worry about the HR totals, etc....almost as if he's still in the minors. Also, Garver was awful behind the plate again. I don't care (for now)...needs to play more.
  18. jkcarew
    (channeling my inner Chief).... Yes. Good questions. My absolute guess would be that they will leave Lewis at SS...almost no matter what...in the minors. My speculative theory being that the cream of the athletic crop, such as Lewis, can almost immediately transition from SS to CF...but not the other way around. And that when the bat is deemed ready, if SS is not an issue with the major league club, but CF is an issue...that they would not hesitate to make that move. Said a different way....keep the development focused on SS. Then when the bat is ready,...and or you get desperate because everyone else is hurt or failing...you (theoretically) would have both defensive options open. All we're asking is that Lewis be like Robin Yount.
  19. jkcarew
    I know, nobody knows, Where it comes and where it goes. I know, it's everybody's sin You got to lose to know how to win. - Steven Tyler (Boston prospect of the very early 70's; went on to a HOF career) Little know fact: the original lyric included the phrase "development is not linear"...but he couldn't get that lyric to work with the riff. I'd say Lewis's arrival will depend, in part, on how his development as SS goes...as it's possible his bat is ready before his glove is, in which case the CF/OF situation comes into play. Nevertheless, my guess is June 2020.
  20. jkcarew
    But the question is “greatest impact on the franchise”...not greatest player. Puckett is the only one even remotely in Killebrew’s category in that regard.
  21. jkcarew
    Imagine a city, metropolitan area, state, entire region, that never experienced a major league sport. (Let's pretend that the NBA was not a major-league sport in the 50's....since it really wasn't.) Also, imagine a time when MLB and MLB stars were infinitely more prominent/important in the culture than the NFL or NBA. Then imagine being handed one of the best players in MLB, the player that would have more home runs in the franchise's first decade than anyone else...yes, more than Willie Mays, and more than Hank Aaron...and would lead the team to a WS and win an MVP in those formative years. I'll accept Kirby Puckett as the answer. But, I really don't think even he had more of an impact than Killebrew on the franchise.
  22. jkcarew
    The overriding question for 2019 will be the same as it was while the Twins were sinking out of contention in 2018...where will the offense come from? So, in that regard, everything dwarfs in comparison to Sano. If you have a 'good' Sano in the middle of the line-up, it moves the needle more than anything else will. Along those same line, if Garver can catch, the incremental offense out of the catchers spot in the lineup moves the needle. I think Kepler can have marginally better results...not needle-moving IMO. Meanwhile, it's crazy to plan on Buxton contribute whatsoever offensively going forward. It can be a happy surprise if it happens, but at this point, the FO would be negligent to assume that will happen when they construct the 2019-2020 roster.
  23. jkcarew
    Agreed. We're not going to see Rortvedt on these lists much. And he doesn't get talked about a ton as we all assume he's still years away. But, he's having the type of year you would want a 20-year-old defense-first catcher to be having. OPS over 700 at CR, and since the promotion to Ft Myers, the OBP is actually up and K% down in early results.
  24. jkcarew
    They are marginally/arguably in a race to win a very bad division. It is open to much subjectivity to equate that with “being in a pennant race”. The Twins FO seems to interpret it the same way I would.
  25. jkcarew
    Don’t get the hand-wringing. Once this season had arrived, Dozier had decided he was going to see what the market would bear....a reasonable position. Meanwhile, the Twins decided they were not going to go the QO route...a reasonable position. At that point, you’re doing a professional disservice to your club AND to Dozier if you don’t simply trade him to a contender for whatever you can get and move on. This is the result when two parties both want to move on. The opportunity for a materially different outcome had long since past.
×
×
  • Create New...