Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

Jim Hahn

Provisional Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    138

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 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 Jim Hahn

  1. Jim Hahn
    I suppose it depends on what stats you subscribe to. If you believe in single number stats like war or OPS he appears to be above average. Those stats are slanted to power. If you like ob% and batting average better, I don't think he looks so good. Just my opinion.
  2. Jim Hahn
    That sort of is the question really. I don't think we know yet, whether they are bad at their jobs. Or more specifically, which part of their job they are good at. Most of us are willing to give them more time. But making a lot of changes to the organization, merely means they have made a lot changes. When we have more outcomes we will see. I would be more confident if I understood the endgame better. They kind of seem to be throwing stuff at the wall to see what sticks. Right now they are pretty dependent on the core pieces they inherited from the previous regime. That will change as time goes on.
  3. Jim Hahn
    1. I tend to agree with this. Even power relievers should be able to get to their mid 30's as effective 1 inning pitcher. I doubt I he will sign for anything close to that, however. 2. I tend to agree with this, tho I like the old style unis best. 3. I have never been that impressed with Castro in a Twins uniform. His defense seems somewhat overrated and offense has been mostly bad. I like Garver, but the Twins have always seemed underwhelmed by his pitcher handling and his overall defense. Astudillo is fun, I would love it if he was at least a half time catcher. I am not to sure the Twins want that tho.
  4. Jim Hahn
    Those are right now at least, significantly different prospects, with significantly different perceived ceilings. One is considered by many as one of the top 20 best prospects in all of baseball. Larnach has only played a little at A ball, I am sure many think highly of him, but he is not now on or probably even close to any top 100 lists. Rooker isn't likely to headline any trade. With low defensive value and questionable on base skills, he will have to show more this year to headline any trade. Kiriloff could probably headline a trade, but you better get somebody pretty darn good and for more than 2 years.
  5. Jim Hahn
    I am not sure what you mean here. The Twins made a bunch trades at the trade deadline, most were prospects, are none good in your view? If you mean great prospects, what about the prospects the White Sox obtained last year? Or do you mean right now the winter of 2019?
  6. Jim Hahn
    And then what happens when your 7 inning pitcher can't get out of the 2nd inning or it takes 3 pitchers to get thru 1 inning. It sounds really good to have your best pitchers pitch as many innings as they can handle, but that is going to vary from appearance to appearance. That was also the philosophy of Billy Martin, Don Baylor, and Pete Rose, all of whom were famous for burning up pitchers. Maybe being flexible and creative will make pitching staffs more effective, there is an equally good chance that if you don't get it right, you will will ruin a bunch of arms. Which has largely happened before with new ideas in baseball. Organizations have always been more interested in what works, rather then looking at the long term health of their pitchers. Maybe that is changing, there is certainly lip service to that effect. Certainly, when you have a dominant arm like Romero, it is in the best interest of everybody to figure out a best usage situation that will keep him around for a long time. That type of thing might be pretty hard to figure out though. It might also mean other pitchers aren't put in their best usage situations.
  7. Jim Hahn
    I think I would like to see him developed as a starter, though he is probably much closer to being a dominant reliever, right now. If he goes into the bullpen now, the temptation would be to use him as a multi inning super reliever. You don't get 80 appearances out that kind of reliever. The issue can be that guys like that seem to get overused. Too close of appearances, too many warm ups, etc. That could be worrisome with a guy who has had arm problems.
  8. Jim Hahn
    It is indeed far too early to give up on Gordon. His AA numbers last year were good. I have no idea what the bad performance at AAA was caused by. Still development is rarely linear. I can remember Denard Span dropping way down on prospect lists because of his performance in the high minors. Gordon seems to be a high character guys, with plenty of talent and pretty well developed skills. I expect to see him succeeding in the majors, soon. I 2nd the thoughts on Rortvedt as well. I expect the hitting to get better and his catching skills are well respected. A long major league career seems likely.
  9. Jim Hahn
    We have had this debate before, but Austin has no real chance to make the roster unless there is an injury. Right now, Cron is better. Even as the 13th man, Austin makes little sense. Either Austudillo or Torreyes makes more sense. The lineup is already overloaded with low average, low ob, high strike out, right hand sluggers. Austin makes sense as AAA insurance, so they will likely try to sneak him through waivers. I don't think either Cron or Austin are very likely long term answers, neither is very likely to provide the production you want at 1b. Rooker, Weil and possibly others look like they could provide similar, maybe better production fairly soon. They will be cheaper which seems to matter to this FO.
  10. Jim Hahn
    My biggest problem with with Perez is the similarity to Mejia. Both are left handed. Both have control and health concerns. Both seem to have back of the rotation ceilings. Neither has spent much time in the bullpen. Both are use him or lose him situations, since neither can be sent to the minors without exposing them to waivers. I think the concerns that Perez may block more high ceiling starters is legimate. Both Perez and Mejia both seem to be guys who could succeed in the bullpen, but probably not as as high leverage guys. Two left handed mop up guys or even multi inning, multi purpose guys seems a little redundant. I guess you can't have too much pitching, and I get the idea that the higher ceiling back of the rotation candidates may need more time at AAA, but I would of rather seen a good reliever, or a roll of the dice on a higher ceiling bounce back starter.
  11. Jim Hahn
    I doubt if Baldelli is the key to much of anything. Since managers aren't allowed to make out lineups and analytics decide in game decisions, the role of the manager is conduit and cheerleader. While this is an overstatement, Brian is right about the intertwinement of FO and on field roles. What will be important is whether the young core steps up. If Schoop, Cron and Cruz are batting 1,2,3, in June, the Twins are in trouble. If Sano and Buxton can't stay healthy and produce, then I want to see somebody from the upper minors getting their chance. No Cave or Andrilanza getting 400 abs. The same thing on the pitching side. Since the FO was unwilling to go after a Kuechel or trade for a Gray, they must believe that they have quality reinforcements among the group that figures to start at AAA or AA. The FO needs to be right about that. The Twins really should be contenders this year. Cleveland wasn't great last year, and on paper, they have gotten worse. It is going to a surprise if any of the other 3 can make a run. I don't think Baldelli should need to motivate anybody or help anybody focus. If these young players can't see where they are in their careers and the need to prepare themselves to play everyday, we have the wrong players.
  12. Jim Hahn
    Stewart in the article is quoted as saying he wasn't ready before last spring for what was being presented to him. Leaving aside the question of whether the previous FO ever presented the "right" information, the question is when to present what information. Clearly with high school kids and international signings the low minors are for teaching mechanics, refining their pitches, adding pitches, striving pitching for consistency, and building strength and durability. Learning all the nuances of pitching may be acquired as you move thru the system, but it likely isn't or shouldn't the focus with young kids. Players who get to the majors at young age generally have dominant fastballs or great stuff, sometimes both. Usually to have a long career, you have to learn how to pitch, and usually sharpen your control. I think blaming the organization or the player for slow development kind of overlooks the fact that it is hard to pitch successfully in the big leagues.
  13. Jim Hahn
    I think a 5-7 year career should be a goal for just about any non elite minor leaguer. For Navaretto, he could easily be a Butera. With a little more bat, he could be a Jose Molina. Those kind of catchers are apparently pretty useful, if not highly valued. I think a career as a catcher who is some part of a platoon situation, is within reach for Navaretto. That isn't so bad.
  14. Jim Hahn
    I am not saying I am right about this. But signing Machado or Harper may not prevent keeping our own core as that becomes necessary, but it may very well prevent filling other unanticipated holes. The thing is Machado going to be so much better at short than Lewis or Javier that it is advisable to move them to another position ? Machado won't come here unless he gets serious guarantees that he gets to play shortstop. Whatever the truth about these observations, I'd rather have pitching. Getting as much top flight pitching as possible would be my choice over either Machado or Harper. I think there is enough talent here and coming shortly to give the Twins good and possibly considerably better than that, offense. Right now, I doubt if that is true about starting pitching.
  15. Jim Hahn
    Oh, I agree that Machado or Harper would make a difference if/when the core guys improve. That just isn't where I would spend my money. I think Lewis and Kiriloff have a very good chance of being able to provide at least close to what those two guys will. It should be soon and cheaper for awhile. If I am going to spend big bucks it would on pitching. Preferably starting pitching. That is unless you are sure the farm can provide that soon.
  16. Jim Hahn
    TOM FROEMMING, thank you for your response to my post. I am always interested in how the Twins view their own prospects. In general the FO gives us the platitudes you mimicked so well in your post. I figure the reason sometimes, that the FO doesn't do the things we as fans would like to see, is that they have very different views of their prospects than we as fans do. Even probably what prospect gurus have. Occasionally we get clues to what the FO might be thinking. How prospects are promoted, who is invited to spring training, certain things that aren't said about prospects. I think we have a pretty good idea about what the FO thinks about about their young major league players and even their near ready position players. I am very unsure about what they really think about guys like Gonsalves, Stewart, Littell, and Wells. They seem to like Romero, but if they really are moving him to the bullpen, what does that tell us? All the starters in the system farther away, we hardly ever get anything but platitudes about them. The thing is, what they think about these guys is pretty important. They aren't going to spend big bucks on a long term contract for a Kuechal, if they think they got one or two near ready in their system. There are a lot of reasons for them to not disclose their evaluations about their prospects, but i sure would like to know more.
  17. Jim Hahn
    If I had a question for Falvey it would be, Is there anybody or anybodys in the near ready group of starters that will be a top of the rotation starter( baring injury)? Depending on the answer, is there in that group a long term major league starter? Next question, how many pitchers in the next group (A, AA) project to be top line major league starters and how soon? If the answers to these questions are none or few or we're not sure, then the final question should be, are you pursuing top end starters?
  18. Jim Hahn
    This answer has nothing to do with what the poster said. Both teams were good during the early years when therespective players were there. The teams were less good at the end of their tenure. Personally, I think the real point is that one player no matter how good, can't make a team good by himself. Largely, neither Machado or Harper will make the Twins good unless the current players get better. It is possible also that different players(pitchers) would more likely make the Twins better than Machado or Harper. That would be my opinion anyway.
  19. Jim Hahn
    I am 67 and I agree that false hustle is silly. Still, if a catcher can jog down the base line to be in position for a possible overthrow, a hitter can do something similar. Putting yourself into position to take advantage of a possible mistake is not false hustle. Standing in the batter's box or taking 2 steps and peeling off to the dugout, I don't know. That feels like laziness or even a lack of respect for the game. I realize not everyone will agree, but still.
  20. Jim Hahn
    I think the Hall of Fame can be interesting and even a little bit funny. I consider it the Hall of the most famous, not necessarily the Hall of the very best players. There are all sort of inequities all over the place, in part because of the rather vague requirements and in part because of who does the selecting. One interesting example is Brooks Robinson and Ken Boyer. Brooks was a 1st ballot, Boyer has been snubbed for decades. They were contemporaries with their peaks years at the same time. Boyer played in the tougher league, was by far the better hitter ( Brooks had one year where his OPS was as good Boyer' s career ops), and was much more versatile, playing over a 100 games in cf one year. Defensively, Boyer was very good. I think he won 6 gold gloves. Brooks was a good hitter, considered maybe the best defensive 3b of all time, and played well in a number of post seasons. He deserves to be in the Hall of Fame. I don't know if Boyer deserves to be in the Hall, but the stats say He was the better player. This is part why I don't worry about who's in the Hall. There are many other ways to celebrate the many great players in the game.
  21. Jim Hahn
    I really don't care about budgets and whether or not the FO is spending as much as they could or should. I don't mind if the FO is pursuing a strategy of combing thru the discard pile, or dumpster diving or whatever you choose to call it. There is no doubt that good players can and are often acquired this way. Sometimes long term producers are found this way. The thing is if you are going to pursue a strategy of finding bargains, looking for marginal upgrades, and looking for bounce back candidates, you need to be good at it. Your processes,evaluations and judgements need to be good. You can't be losing many Derreck Rodriguez' s or going through the whole process of identifying, signing and working with the perfect bounce back candidate in Anibal Sanchez and then getting no benefit from that good work. Be good at this strategy also means more than getting good value for what you spend. The pieces have to fit together. Is having 2/3 of your lineup comprised of what appear to Be low acerage,poor contact, high strike out sluggers a good thing? Does adding Perez even at a bargain price, when you already have a very similar pitcher in Meija? Both are backend starter types who haven't worked out of the bullpen. Neither can be sent to the minors. Do both fit on the same roster? It is too early to say that this FO can't execute this strategy. Nick Nelson is right about that. So are the people wondering whether this strategy will help the Twins contend even if the core group actually become a core group. The FO chose this strategy rather than make bigger perhaps more easily justified splashes. Now they need to make their chosen strategy work.
  22. Jim Hahn
    Everybody understands/remembers that everyone mentioned in the last paragraph came off the same sort of discard pile that Cruz, Cron, Parker, Schoop, and Perez came off of. They were all acquired during during the off season. All were acquired during a down period, if not necessarily the exact off season before a very good season. Most were short term acquisitions to fill a specific hole, although some were kept around for a few seasons. Most teams do this. We just remember these specific decisions because they just worked so well.
  23. Jim Hahn
    I find this interesting. Curtiss sort of reminds me of Michael Tonkin in a general way. Great minor league numbers, didn't translate to the majors, in a small sample size. In Tonkin's case, his weaknesses sort of outwayed his strengths. He couldn't hold on runners, field his position, his size and lack of atheletism made repeating his mechanics difficult. I haven't seen enough of Curtiss to make the same kind of statement. I do think that maybe the FO views him somewhat the same. Certain weaknesses that his strengths aren't great enough to overcome.
  24. Jim Hahn
    That is fair way to explain the concept. It way even work that way, if you can count on the opener to get thru that 1st inning unscathed. If the opener puts your starter in a hole any significant amount of the time, then the value is gone. If occasionally your opener can't get out of that first inning, you either have to bring in your starter in the middle od the inning or use up up another reliever. There are other potential downsides as well. Teams will start preparing for openers better. The idea of starting the game with what is likely your your 11th or 12th best pitcher, I don't know. Usually you use those guys for mop up,or 1 out specialists, which they can't do if you have already used them up. The other question is why does a starter struggle in the first inning. Is it really because he is facing the other teams best hitters? Or maybe it just takes an inning to figure out what's working? Maybe he will still struggle if his 1st inning is the 2nd inning.
  25. Jim Hahn
    All of this is speculation and my opinion does not matter. But I do have certain concerns about Machado. Character matters. I wonder about a player who can't be bothered to run out ground balls in the playoffs or seemed to be trying to injure other players. I am not so sure I want my team to tie themselves to a player like that for ten years. Machado is certainly a very good player and plays premium positions. I do wonder if his production was boosted a bit by his home park. Camden Yards is definitely a hitters park. If it costs him 10% of his production if he calls Target Field home, is he still worth the money? Machado can't win anything by himself. For him to be useful to the Twins, the young core has to step up. Buying Martinez and trading for Sale, certainly made Boston better in 2018. Still the biggest difference from 2017 to 2018 for Boston was that their young core stayed healthy and stepped up their games. Personally, I believe that upgrading the pitching would have greater positive effect on the Twins than adding Machado would. While the kind of upgrade I am suggesting could cost as much per year, it may not be for as many years as Machado would reqire.
×
×
  • Create New...