amjgt
-
Posts
3,143 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
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
Forums
Blogs
Events
Store
Downloads
Gallery
Everything posted by amjgt
-
I challenge you to find one article or heck, even one discussion board post, where the writer refers to any of our prospects as "can't miss" You seem to be projecting your frustration at the hit rate of our top prospects onto the people that thoughtfully write about our top prospects. -
There was no sunk cost for Hendriks and Chaffin. Larnach is the real test of Sunk cost fortitude from the front office. I never really expected them to find a taker for Larnach and I didn't expect them to light $4.3M on fire, so having him on the 26 man to start the season always felt like a 90% proposition. The real test is if he stinks by the end of April or if he's just league average offensively by the start of June. That's when the real "change in roster construction philosophy articles" should come.
-
We're on a baseball discussion board. I think we all look incredibly foolish. 😜
-
Interesting side note: Only FOUR of our top 30 prospects in 2019 are not with a major league organization at the moment.
-
I disagree with you on the value of Grade 40 prospects. I'm sure MLB is littered with former grade 40 prospects that proved the talent evaluators wrong. They aren't sexy, but if you had a bunch of grade 40 prospects, you're likely to get one solid starter and one solid contributor out of the bunch. Here's a snapshot of the Twins 2019 prospect rankings:
-
The confidence with which people assert their opinions as facts will never not astound me.
-
3 Twins Position-Player Prospect Predictions for 2026
amjgt replied to Cody Christie's topic in Twins Minor League Talk
The last mock draft I saw had Lebron falling to like #13 and Minnesota taking a college pitcher. So, I'm not sure EVERYONE expects Lebron to the Twins. https://pitcherlist.com/way-too-early-2026-mlb-mock-draft/ -
Yeah. Bullpens can be weird, but this is, without a doubt, the lowest expectations I have for a Twins bullpen this century. It's almost impossible to see a scenario where they are above average and it's REALLY easy to see them being one of the worst couple in the league.
-
For me, #1 vs #2 vs #3 vs #4 vs #5 is completely meaningless until the playoffs. You're either one of the 5 in the rotation or you're not.
-
The point of my previous post is that counting Ohl and Adams as starting pitching depth (because they DID start games) is a little bit of a stretch to me. They were starters in name only, not practice. Also, I was more commenting on Gleeman's general discussion of the topic, not your specific post about it.
-
The possible difference between last year and this year is the hip injury. I think many of us assumed that the hip injury is what caused the dip in velocity, but it's possible that his velocity is just down 2-3mph and it's unrelated to the hip. If we assume for a second that is the case, then it's possible his numbers trend better now that he's not dealing with the hip injury. Said a different way, if you attribute half of Ober's worse results in 2025 to the hip and the other half to a decrease in velocity, even if he doesn't get the velocity back, we could see better results than 2025 (though very unlikely as good as 2023/24). Yes. I'm currently wearing my rose-colored glasses.
-
In my opinion, Gleeman tends to overstate this a bit. It's undoubtably true, but I suspect that the 7 pitcher thing would apply to the vast vast majority of MLB teams. So in that way, by continually mentioning it (on the podcast or in print) he's exaggerating it in respect to how it affects the Twins compared to others. I think the much more interesting data point would be how many starting pitchers get used for more than 2 starts in a given season. Openers throw a little bit of a wrench in how clean that data is, but in my opinion that type of analysis is more meaningful to what we are talking about. There are ALWAYS going to be spot starters coming up from AAA for one reason or another (illness, double headers, etc), but I don't really care about those very much. How many guys are going to be part of your regular rotation over the course of a season? THAT is what I care about. And I suspect the Twins, over the last decade, use an above average number in a given season.
-
I'm fine with Ober attempting to get by on veteran guile for now. In my mind, he's in the rotation this year until he proves that he can't make it work at 89mph. In spring training so far, he has. That probably won't continue, but I can't cut Ober from the rotation based on expected results over actual results If he makes it work, then we reassess after the season. If he doesn't make it work (like many expect), then we make some changes in season. I do acknowledge that this might mean bringing in Giolito makes more sense. Preparing for an expected outcome is different that assuming the expected outcome.
-
I have no idea if it would be better or worse, but I wonder what the Twins run differential would be if you only counted the first 6 innings
-
Molitor really is excellent. Glad we get him in the TV booth for some games this year (I'm guessing around 10) The last few years it seems to be something like: Morneau - 40% Perkins - 20% Another guy - 15% Another guy - 10% 3 other guys - 5% each (one road trip of 6/7 games) I'm guessing Molitor will be the 10/15% guy with the majority of them over the summer when Morneau is spending time with his kids.
-
So you're just ignoring the more than twice as many innings he pitched for the Twins last year with a 2.02 ERA? You truly believe that if Varland was on this team he wouldn't be our best reliever? Because of 23 innings for the Jays last year?
-
Twins Trim 9 from Roster Including Multiple Top Prospects
amjgt replied to Cody Christie's topic in Minnesota Twins Talk
I think the Super 2 has been toned down a ton in the last decade or so, to the point that it rarely gets talked about any more. The mid-April deadline, however, is definitely still a thing. But it's a thing for like 28 of the 30 teams. It's disingenuous to pretend that the Twins are in some minority here. The cost-benefit of stashing a player at AAA for 1/12th of the season vs calling him up is just too large. They've tried to provide some incentives to soften that cost benefit (PPI for example), but that benefit is just too small and unlikely to be worth it. And the types of players who might get you a PPI draft pick are exactly the types of players where that 7th year has the most value.- 16 replies
-
- 4
-
-
- gabriel gonzalez
- john klein
- (and 7 more)
-
Ironically if you would've just quoted my very next post, you might have something. But you're too busy trying to make some bizarre point to realize that
-
If you divide 4 by 2, you get 2 That isn't "condition, supposition, or uncertainty, meaning a result happens only on the condition that something else occurs" That's just math.
-
What are you talking about? "If" in this context isn't projecting future results. "If" here is just doing the math on past results.
-
What?!?!?! I know isn't the point of the article, but when you write things like this at the start of an article, I can't help but think about it the rest of the way.
-
I'm also pretty confident that if you tossed Larnach over in RF you'd have way more teams running on his arm than they do on Wallner, which is a hard thing to quantify with these stats, but is almost certainly a real thing and at the very least a soft benefit.
-
One point to add to those cumulative stats is that Wallner played about 50% more innings in the OF last year than Larnach. If you normalize that to something like per 100 innings, Larnach would have more than twice as much negative Defensive Run value than Wallner and similar negative OAA.
-
We might get our answer once Kaelen Culpeeper eventually gets cut from camp, since he finished the year at AA
-
The problem with this trade isn't the value that we got, which seems pretty good, but the fact that it was done in conjunction with a) trading all the other good relievers at the same time, and b) not investing in rebuilding that decimated bullpen in the offseason. He'd probably be our closer this season and only be making $1M, which, yeah, is why we got good value for him, but is a tough pill to swallow when you look at the arms in this bullpen right now.
