Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

miracleb

Verified Member
  • Posts

    109
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by miracleb

  1. I have been listening for over a year and enjoyed your views and ideas! Time to find another partner!
  2. 2: Graterol wasn't going to be a factor for the Twins as a starter this year. Even if he avoids injuries entirely, there was no scenario in which he was going to handle a starter's workload all season long, and still be available for October. I reject this premise(above.) Graterol probably threw 200 innings when he was 15 years old. "Building him up" to be a starter for a couple of years doesn't fit with biology which probably says that he is now at (or close) to his physical peak. Building up Odorizzi's arm in spring training to be a starter could easily be done for Graterol as well. Now if the staff didn't think he could be a quality starter (like Homer Bailey,) then that is an arguement I am comfortable with leaving up to Wes Johnson.
  3. Ha.....I have to agree with this comment. I was probably closer to assuming he wasn't on the top 20 list at all compared to him being #1.
  4. Seemed like Sano had made the effort to come in lighter last year but then gained weight while he was sidelined.......so he knows what/how to get fit. Not sure if anyone has seen a photo of him in the past 3 months, but I will be curious to see what he looks like when he shows up for spring traning!
  5. Jon Gray is very similar to Gibson......and we gave up on Gibson. Arenado is a stud but is it possible he hit a lot of those home runs because of where he played? Rockies would do that deal in a heartbeat and the Twin would take a big PASS.
  6. Front office would look like geniuses for 3 out of the 4 years!!
  7. hee hee....how about 4 years at $77/$1/$1/$1 LOL!
  8. I am afraid this WILL be what we are looking at! My guess would be Dobnak and Smeltzer to start while Pineda is out. Best of the two stays ....when Pineda comes back.
  9. Tom, I agree that there is no reason to disrespect anyone. I also don't think there is anything wrong with explaining why the trade(s) were good or bad. Sure, we could trade Lewis, Thorpe, Larnach, etc for a number 4 starter this year and it would be more beneficial for the Twin's record in 2020. You can't look at these things in a vacuum. If, 5 years from now, it is obvious that Ynoa is better than Littell, then it can be confirmed that it was botched. No harm in admitting that.
  10. "The big difference here is that Schales is already out of the organization" That obviously makes the trade look considerably worse. This is an obvious trade that we can "look back on" and determine that it was botched(or at least a poor evaluation of talent.)
  11. PS "I am inclined to think that unless Ynoa develops in the next Aroldis Chapman as a closer this is ultimately a good sequence of moves for the Twins...." That sentence is more absurd than anything. That is like saying trading Nick Anderson to the Marlins for Brian Schales is a good trade for the Twins if Nick Anderson DOESN'T develop into the next Mariano Rivera......
  12. I mostly agree with this but looking at the long term ramifications of trades definitely should be taken into consideration. Giving up a long term asset for a short term gain is a decision that needs to be evaluated. If the short term gain "didn't work," then I think we can decide for ourselves that the decision/trade was a "fail." Right now, I would think it would be doubtful that Atlanta would even-up trade a 21 year old Ynoa for a 24 yr old Littell.
  13. I mostly agree with this as far as the market dictates what someone is worth initially. But, we can ALL look at a 5 year contract...after the 5 years are up.....and determine if the contract was worth it or not. Some we might be able to debate, but most are definitely "the front office made an excellent signing"...or..."the front office completely blew it". The concern is losing your job because of botched signings. "Taking a risk" or "signing an obviously bad contract just to get a guy" is how FO careers get ended. THAT is what the front office is concerned with.
  14. This signing would make no sense. Too bad Rendon signed already because we could have added him as well and then have 3 starters at 3rd base. The only way this could make sense is that you have a blockbuster trade for Sano lined up and we have a top flight pitcher coming our way. I doubt that is happening.
  15. I wanted Reed to make the the 25-man and send Cave down (strictly to keep both of them in the system.) But you are right......Cave earned it last year!
  16. I think Cave gets optioned and they keep Michael Reed. Reed was a "cagey" move by the front office and I don't think they want to let him go yet. I also think letting Austin go will end up being a 7-8 year regret.....so they find a way to keep him as well (more HOPING they keep him.)
  17. "I think that the Twins' bench is done." I don't think the Twins want to lose Michael Reed (who is out of options.) Jake Cave might be sent to Rochester to start the season. Now that Reed is able to play again, I think we will see a lot of him over the next couple of weeks.
  18. Buxton MVP candidate? Didn't he have a 5 for 5 game early on? Since then, he is 2 for 15 for a .134 average. I sure hope he can turn it around....but it seems like there are going to be a lot of strike outs and probably a sub .250 batting average. We can still hang our hat on his defense though.......which still makes him a starter!
  19. "Catcher might be shaky. I am not confident Castro will return as plus defender given his injury and age at the catcher position." Totally agree...except Castro has never been a plus defender. Below average caught stealing rate. But boy can he frame a pitch! At least we can hang our hat on the fact that he can't hit either.
×
×
  • Create New...