Jump to content
Our first free agents ranking has launched, click here to see the top 40+ names in free agency! ×
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

SteelDodo

Verified Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    71

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 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 SteelDodo

  1. SteelDodo
    Wow that's a good point. Falvey inherited a BARREN farm system. I count two players (Kirilloff and Garver) out of the top 20 who are likely to get through arbitration with the Twins... ouch
  2. SteelDodo
    In contrast to some of the previous commenters, in my opinion, it is WAY too early to be criticizing the returns from the 2018 trades. When trading for prospects, the value received in the trade is the SIX years worth of contributions after the prospects reach the majors. At this point, only a few of the 2018 prospects have made the majors, and even then they have only been on the major league roster for a year or two. We'll know the true value of the trades in another ~8 years from now.
  3. SteelDodo
    Wow, interesting trade. I think it is a BIG overpay by SD, but I would have no issues accepting this deal. Frankly, I think I would still accept the deal (though it would be a closer decision) if the Padres only offered two of Gore/Abrams/Hassel in addition to the younger 2. One thing that I really like though, is I hope the Twins can prioritize quality over quantity. I would MUCH rather get ~2-3 top 100 prospects, rather than a bunch of lower tier prospects. I think that packaging Berrios, Buxton, and Rogers (in some order) will likely yield higher prospects than if the Twins were to trade them each separately.
  4. SteelDodo
    Good list! Personally, I would move Julien to ~20. Should be some interesting discussions when deciding who to add to the 40 man. It looks like there are at least 5 that NEED to be added.
  5. SteelDodo
    I think that's a great way of thinking about it. a) I want to trade everyone in group A that has ANY sort of value. b) I am hoping to trade the three in group B (with the expectation there will be a GREAT return for each). c) For group C, I'm fine trading any of these guys if another team makes a fair offer, but I won't sell any of them at a discount. I'm expecting these will be our veteran leaders over the next year or two, so, I'm expecting all of them (or at least most of them) to stay put.
  6. SteelDodo
    Fun conversation! I am of the opinion that we should look to trade anyone who will not be on the team in 2023. (so I'm fine keeping Donaldson, Polanco, Garver, and Kepler unless someone blows us away with a trade offer). To that point, I'm not sure why people are discussing trading Berrios/Buxton, but hoping to keep Rogers? To me, I view them all in the same tier. They all have 1.5 years left on their contracts, so I assume that Rogers will also leave with Berrios and Buxton when when their contracts are up. Rogers will never have as much trade value as he does right now, so I think we should be actively looking trade him too. (Obviously, I'd love to keep all 3 long term, but I'm assuming all want to test free agency, and I don't want any of them to leave for nothing)
  7. SteelDodo
    To me, I think of Berrios, Buxton, and Rogers in the same way. They are all top notch players, and I would love to keep them long-term if they were willing to sign a deal. Although if we can't extend them, then we should trade them now. I don't want any of them to leave for nothing in a year and a half.
  8. SteelDodo
    Interesting. After a quick, 5 minute reading over the three prospects, I think I'd do that trade. Mauricio is listed at 51 on MLBs top 100 prospects, and Ginn looks like he would become our third best pitching prospect after Duran/Balazovic. It also wouldn't surprise me at all if he becomes a top 100 prospect at some point too. For a year and a half of Berrios, I would be happy with a haul of two minor leaguers who would instantly go in our top 5 prospects, and a third who would likely be in our top 15.
  9. SteelDodo
    Fun to do the midseason rankings! Personally, I would move Miranda and Cavaco in between Winder and Rooker. Otherwise, I think my list would be pretty much the same. Out of curiosity, if you were ranking the next 5, would Julien, Steer (and possibly Palacios) be in that tier? I think they are all pretty close to top 20.
  10. SteelDodo
    I'm a firm believer in making anyone available for the right price, but I wouldn't want to trade either if I could help it. As others have said, between C, 1B, and DH, I think there will be plenty of at bats for Garver even without any injuries. Also, Garver has 2 years on his contract after this one. Generally, the more years on a contract, the more prospect capital it would take to acquire a player. Knowing how high the price tag would be now, I imagine most teams wouldn't even be interested in trading for him until next year's trade deadline at the earliest.
  11. SteelDodo
    Glad there are multiple potential suitors! I hope this means there will be a bidding war...
  12. SteelDodo
    Ooo reranking the prospects sounds like fun! As far as our hitters go, the one I've been most excited about (besides Miranda obviously) has been Julien. After him is Wallner and Steer. I think all three are solidly around the 8-12 range.
  13. SteelDodo
    As far as other promotions go, it seems like the best three (healthy) hitters in our minor league system all play second base: Miranda, Steer, and Julien. Moving each of them up a level makes sense since they can fill the hole left by the other.
  14. SteelDodo
    As a point of reference, of our 8 position players, tonight we have exactly one who is playing in the spot that he was playing on opening day. If the team weren't already waiving the white flag...
  15. SteelDodo
    I'm fine with either. If there's a good deal on the table, trade him. If not, I'd be perfectly happy locking in a Pineda for another few years. Pineda is someone I think the team could realistically extend, so the answer to your question is completely different than it would be for the players who almost certainly will not be on the team two years from now (e.g., Cruz, Happ, Berrios, Buxton, Colome, Simmons, and probably Taylor Rogers, and Duffey too). Trade every one of those guys.
  16. SteelDodo
    I think Rooker can still be a contributor to an MLB team, but I think his realistic ceiling is as a replacement level player. (I expect his career to be similar to Tyler Austin. He'll hit some home runs, but he'll be more of a bench bat for an average team, or a replacement level starter for a very poor team). At this point, I'm hoping that Rooker lights up AAA for the next month or two. Then he can be an add-in as part of a larger trade (like Luke Raley, Jaylin Davis, or Lamonte Wade). Wallner will be breathing down Rooker's neck very soon. I imagine he'll be moved up to AA soon, and it wouldn't surprise me if he starts at AAA next year. So, by then Rooker will need to either move up or move on.
  17. SteelDodo
    Any update on Soularie? Hopefully he can play soon. Also, I think I heard someone say that he would try to play 2b instead of outfield, but that may have just been a random fan idea instead of from the team itself.
  18. SteelDodo
    I think this last sentence is the point that I disagree with. Obviously nobody wants to trade Berrios, and the team would be worse off without him, but the difference in a trade package this year (when he has 1.5 years left) vs trading him next year (when he only has half a season left) should be a BIG difference. I'll defer to Matthew's next article for more specifics, but just completely ball parking here: trading him this year might mean obtaining two prospects that become top 10 in the Twins system, while trading him next year might only net something closer to one in the top 10-15 and one in the top 30 (e.g., obtaining players the caliber of Balazovic + Canterino is MUCH different than Enlow + Luis Rijo). [note that I just made these examples up, and the values may be way off. The point is that the difference between trading Berrios this year and next will be very significant]
  19. SteelDodo
    Are we convinced that a few weeks of Kirilloff would even be better than a few weeks of Cave/Rooker/Arraez? (Assuming that once Kirilloff is called up, he'll be a full-time player.) Service issues aside, I'd put my money on the platoon. Once Kirrilloff kills AAA for a few weeks, then bring him up. What is the downside to allowing him start in the minors for a little while? Also, and this is complete conjecture on my part, but I think that Rooker would have started the playoff game if he had been healthy.
  20. SteelDodo
    I'm a big Rooker fan. I'd rather start him in LF, and start Kirilloff at AAA.
  21. SteelDodo
    I don't share the same fear over Donaldson. Yes, he probably will decline somewhat, but there are several factors that makes his deal more palatable than many of the others listed. 1. He is an upgrade with his bat AND his defense. Even when one starts to decline, he'll still provide value (unlike Chris Davis). If his bat decreases, he will still play great D at 3B. Likewise, if his D decreases, he can shift to 1B or DH. 2. This is a 4-5 year deal instead of an 8-13 year deal. 3. At the time of the deal, the Twins were in a "win now" mode, and foreseeably will be for the duration of the deal. Much of their core will still be with the team for the next ~3 years (Sano, Kepler, Buxton, Maeda, Berrios, Polanco, etc.). I agree that it is absolutely a waste of money to have an aging/expensive veteran on a rebuilding & losing team (e.g. Davis on the Orioles or Cabrera on the Tigers), but the Twins will likely be in contention for next few years and the duration of his deal. There is a good chance that the Twins will be in a massive rebuild in ~4 years. Until then, I'm glad they are putting all the chips in for the next few years.
  22. SteelDodo
    I'd try to work Blankenhorn in similar to Rooker. Rooker hasn't take ALL the extra OF innings from Kepler. Instead, he has been playing about 50% of the time, with Wade & Cave working in too. I don't see why Gonzalez & Blankenhorn can't platoon until Arraez comes back.
  23. SteelDodo
    Yep, I agree with this. Gonzalez has also been getting a lot of play in the OF too. Maybe at this point in his career that's his best spot, but I would be a fan of giving those extra at bats to Rooker. Then move Gonzalez back to the IF. Yesterday, for example, Adrianza started at 3B, and Vargas started at 2B. I would MUCH rather have Gonzalez at 3B, and put either Adrianza or Vargas on the bench. Yes, Rooker may struggle at first, but his bat can't be much worse than Adrianza/Vargas/Cave/Wade right now, and his upside is substantially higher. On an unrelated note, where is Gordon? I think he's not even in St. Paul now right? I imagine he has more upside at this point than Vargas/Adrianza too.
  24. SteelDodo
    Ummm... genuine question. Why is Kepler batting 8th? Even if he is slumping, I'm sure he's still better than Vargas, Adrianza, and Gonzalez. Am i missing something?
  25. SteelDodo
    I am all for giving Rooker a shot in the majors this year. When healthy, he was destroying AAA last year. I am a little nervous about his high K rate, and because of that, Gonzalez MAY be the better 1B option this year. However, I would rather have Rooker in the lineup this year instead of Adrianza, Astudillo, or Wiel. Also, and I know that the primary goal is to win this year, but I think it's worth mentioning that Gonzalez and Adrianza are on the last year of their deals (so I don't think they'll be back next year), and I don't think Wiel is in the team's long-term plans. If Rooker's bat will be roughly equivalent this year, if not better, than any of them, then wouldn't it help Rooker's development to give the at bats to someone (Rooker) that the team has control over for another 6 years instead of someone who will be gone in the next year or two anyways? As for Kirilloff, I would hate to pigeonhole him into only being a first baseman. It's always nice to have position flexibility, but I would rather he focus on OF. Then he can takeover as the starting LF in a year or two (or this year if Rosario is injured).
×
×
  • Create New...