Jump to content
Our top free agent ranking is up to 75 names; click here to check it out! ×
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

jkcarew

Old-Timey Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    5,619

  • 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
    Yeah...I don't think they're saying that clubs are going to simply start taking their 4th and 5th best starters and automatically plug them into the late-inning role. Instead, I took the comment to mean that clubs are starting to feel or starting to find that the ability to command one great pitch is more rare than the ability to command 2-3 average pitches. At the same time, 4th and 5th guys get skipped so much, don't have a post-season role, etc., etc. I'm oversimplifying, but this is how I interpret the FG comment.
  2. jkcarew
    IMO it's easy to see what some see in Rortverdt...he's an extremely athletic catcher, with very high defensive upside, and a chance to hit half-way decently. The key words in all that being the word 'catcher' and 'defensive'. And, while I'm not much of a "he was young for his level" guy when it comes to prospects we are speculating might have actual value in the majors some day....he was REALLY young/inexperienced for his level last year. I also think he will at least start in CR, with the hope that he will settle in early and earn a promotion relatively early during the season.
  3. jkcarew
    I see the NFL challenges as political (player health, perceptions of player conduct, etc.), I see MLB's as more fundamental to their economic structure. But your point is well taken. I worry too much. The national debt has bothered me for about a quarter century now...and the current yield on a 10-year treasury bond is 3%.
  4. jkcarew
    This is true, but I see it as a bubble forming...because it really doesn't seem to make sense to me. Viewership is declining and attendance is dropping. The popularity of MLB is not on a positive trend. How long can the revenue model hold? It seems something's got to give. Admittedly, bubbles can last a long time...and sometime they don't end in ugliness because changes happen that relieve the pressure before things get too dire. Maybe we're starting to see that here. But I can't say I'm optimistic at all.
  5. jkcarew
    Thanks for the info. Seems like Arraez is paying a huge price for missing the year. I guess for now I'll just be happy that the experts feel so many have passed him.
  6. jkcarew
    Finally others starting to share my irrational (or not, we'll see) exuberance regarding Baddoo! Where did Law have Luis Arraez? Baseball America has him as the best hitter for average in the system, yet he can't seem to crack anyone's top 20. Another sign of the depth, perhaps.
  7. jkcarew
    Nice list, Seth! By the time you're to #15, I would have been good with Morneau, Pascual, Gaetti, Gladden, Gagne, Perry...in no particular order.
  8. jkcarew

    Robo Umps

    jkcarew replied to Platoon's topic in Other Baseball

    Not yet. Seems there's a long way to go with regard to accurately, fairly, consistently, establishing the top and bottom of the zone...or even how you should solve for that. Current (from the article) technology relies on human operators establishing the top and bottom for each plate appearance. Until that's solved...and it's not going to be easy...I'm not too excited about implementing something that really wouldn't solve for the real and perceived problems of inconsistency and bias.
  9. jkcarew
    Thanks for the correction. I was including his 91 plate appearances in the 2016 Arizona fall league which enhanced the 2016 numbers. It really comes down to what was going on in those last three months. The regression was across the board. We'll find out this year, I think. I'm worried, but on the other hand, there have been many 3-month blips in otherwise good and even great careers.
  10. jkcarew
    I hope that's the case. I count myself as more 'worried' than down on him. Primarily worried about the commitment to the profession. Not doubting it because I don't know, but worrying about it. Sounds like he might be in a bit of a unique position with other attractive options in terms of life-style and money, etc.
  11. jkcarew
    ***Mike T (Hudson): Nick Gordon dropped big from 2017 to 2018, but he improved on every category except Strike Outs. Whats the reason for the drop?*** This is pretty misleading. Gordon's BA and OBP were down and his strike-out rate was up, and up fairly significantly. His HR's went from 3 to 9 which raised his SLG enough that his OPS was up microscopically. You could argue his fielding and base-running numbers improved slightly, but they were not good by any stretch. But most importantly, it's pretty unrealistic to expect all evaluators to ignore just how bad those last three months were. He's a 5th over-all pick out of HS, he's going into his age 22 season. This is the year. Last year's 2nd-half might be a blip, maybe he had an injury we don't know about, maybe he isn't that good, maybe he was preoccupied with the pending release of his album. I think all takes are reasonable, and that's probably why we're seeing such divergent opinions on Gordon.
  12. jkcarew
    Why would a cash-strapped, struggling franchise like the Rays want to trade a young (let's say at least 'above average') starter with a great contract? To whom is that asset more valuable than it already is for a franchise like the Rays? They don't. And, nobody. BTW...My house is perfect for us and our teen-aged kids. But I'm accepting offers this spring for $200k more than it's worth. If you're interested, I'll let you know how to contact me. It seems to me that we are rapidly getting to a point where it's possible that acquiring Archer in 2018 is going to be a 'buy-high' proposition, while acquiring Darvish is going to be a 'buy-low' proposition. Well, low-ish. With regard to Darvish, I didn't see that coming.
  13. jkcarew
    Me too. Sign of things to come? Or just the calm before the (2019) storm?
  14. jkcarew
    Lots of good ideas posted so far, I think. Some may not be terribly viable, but I think the point is that MLB needs to get serious about this. It seems reasonable to assume that the length of game issue would be a significant factor in the slip in popularity polls that baseball has been on for a few years now. Along with considering things like pitch clock and strike zones, MLB needs to consider more radical changes like restricting the number of pitchers 'active' for each game. Or limiting the number of in-inning pitching changes available to the manager each game. The way the use of rosters has evolved along with the way managers have used pitchers has really killed the pace of play and the flow of games. Need to consider anything and everything to create disincentive for the relentless discussions on the mound and in-inning pitching changes. Unfortunately, I think MLB will get serious about fixing this only when the sponsor bubble finally bursts and the money starts shrinking. Not a second earlier. I think that day is coming, though.
  15. jkcarew
    Is there an argument for Santana in the Hall? Yes. But it's silly to compare him to Kirby Puckett (or Sandy Koufax). Postseason and championships matter...and they should. Especially when you are the undisputed star/leader of the championship team...more than once. As the very first poster mentions, the much more realistic (non-pitcher) comparison would be Tony Oliva. Would I put Santana in? No.
  16. jkcarew
    My glass is half-full today. While I feel that Gordon earned a slip down the rankings, pretty much everyone's top 10 makes me feel a little better than where we were a year ago. I feel that if Gordon isn't a short-stop, I'd rank Luis Arraez ahead of him. But we'll see. Maybe he is a short-stop. If a list is slanted toward up-side, I'm mildly surprised Akil Baddoo doesn't crack the top 10. Regardless, I'm mildly optimistic that I can think of other names that are not even on this list that I feel have a very good chance of being useful down the road as either trade material or for the major league club. Jermaine Palacios is another name that comes to mind in that regard.
  17. jkcarew
    "market deal" will be north of 6-yrs / $200M, right? Greinke got more than that two years ago heading into his 32-yo season. He got 6/206+. And that was to a mid-market club. Seems there are sufficient players in the market to at least realize that. My guess (regardless of where anyone might fall on a technical Greinke/Darvish comparison) is that this is where Darvish's agents put the floor. I see very little change of this happening for the Twins, and at that cost, I'm not sure I'd be upset if it doesn't.
  18. jkcarew
    I mean....if the FO has already determined that Sano must be moved for his health...then I guess. But it would be pretty disappointing if that determination has to be made already. And to be fair, a couple of years from now we could end up wishing we had made a move on Moustakas (assuming he stays being Moustakas). But right now it kinda feels square peg / round hole. Also, when we say Moustakas can hit LHP....kinda, I guess. Consistently sub-300 OBP against LHP, so it's not like he really ever gets on base. But his power doesn't seem to diminish much, and his strike-out rate stays steady.
  19. jkcarew
    I understand the idea behind the decision to leave the roster spots open and expose the likes or Bard and Burdi. But not to use the spots for Rodney and Kinley. Sigh. I actually would have been more encouraged if the Twins had not signed Rodney today and not taken anyone in the Rule 5.
  20. jkcarew
    I refuse to be critical of what amounts to a one-year $8 million deal...simply because I wanted the team to make bigger deals for better pitchers. I honestly don't think this deal will limit in any way what the Twins may want to consider later...including later today. Nor will it make them less likely to pull the trigger on anything. If/when they pass on the $100-$200 million pitcher, it won't be because of the $8 they've spent on Pineda. So, for what this deal is...I like it. Decent chance of representing at least a marginal improvement to the rotation or (if we end up doing better later), a huge improvement to the bullpen. And in a year where we should be in a position for it to matter. I think both sides showed creativity in this deal.
  21. jkcarew
    Yeah. I would really not want to see Lewis go based on the ceiling as it stands so early. But I think 'untouchable' is a strong word, one I think management has to avoid as much as possible. Basically, the term/concept of 'untouchable' only has meaning to me within the context of a specific offer. For instance, I am willing to go only THIS FAR for player A; meanwhile, I'll go THIS FAR for player B.
  22. jkcarew
    Yikes. Not me. To me you don't trade the number 1 overall pick, when that pick is a position player, and especially when that pick is going to be a middle-of-the-field defender, to obtain any pitcher. At least not until that number 1 pick has had a chance to show you some cracks that will limit that ceiling. That day may come for Lewis (I sincerely hope it doesn't)...but I don't think we're there at this point. Too soon. Now when I say "any" pitcher.....well, let's just say Archer would not be an exception to the rule.
  23. jkcarew
    To me the only thing worth quibbling about in a hypothetical Gordon-Jay-Granite for Cole trade would be how to factor in the issue of only getting 2 years of control. If you were confident that you could solve for that problem, I don't see why the names would bother a Twins fan. Gordon did not seem 'almost ready' for the entire 2nd half of last year. While he's been younger than his competition all along the way, based on what he's shown offensively so far, it seems a great deal of his value will be dependent upon playing a position that nobody seems convinced he can play on an every-day basis at the major league level. Granite...as a left-handed hitter (without power), has exactly zero offensive value for the twins. He's injury insurance. If you think you can significantly improve your rotation, you're going to be ok worrying about injury insurance on another day. Tyler Jay at this point is a 24 year old high-risk, high-upside, lottery ticket. Based on organizational depth, risk, fit with current roster...these guys would be at the very top of the list of prospects (that actually have value) I would be willing to move if I were Twins management.
  24. jkcarew
    While the 80's don't seem that long ago for some of us, they were, in fact, a completely different era in terms of baseball. Starters were not charged with "missing bats" (meanwhile, at least two-thirds of the lineups were actually trying to put the ball in play)...instead, they were expected to work fast and eat up as many innings as possible while keeping their team in the game. Jack did this as good, or better, than anyone else in baseball for the better part of a decade. IMO, there is a Hall argument to be made with his regular-season performances, given the era. Having said that, I don't think it's a particularly strong argument. I think the WS performances pushed him over the top. And the one he had with the Twins was historical. It just was.
  25. jkcarew
    No problem. Just go out and win a couple of world series if you haven't already...and make sure you're the MVP in one of them. And, oh yeah....work in one Game 7 10-inning Complete-Game Shutout...you know, where if you had given up a run at any point during the game, your team would have lost the World Series, but instead they won the World Series. If you've got about the same or slightly better numbers than Jack, this should put you over the hump. There are a few different way's guys have made it to the hall...I don't have an issue with this one. And, it's not like he sucked otherwise. When he was playing, he was consistently and broadly considered to be among the best pitchers in the league.
×
×
  • Create New...