Whammy
-
Posts
3,878 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
3
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 Whammy
-
Current 7pm forecast from the site I've been using
-
MLB Insider: Twins “Look Increasingly Unlikely to Sell”
Whammy replied to Cody Christie's topic in Minnesota Twins Talk
Brody Hopkins seems like a reasonable ask for a guy like Jeffers (Fringe top 100 guy, putting up so so numbers at AAA). Normally I'd say TB doesn't seem like a team that would trade young controllable pitching for a rental, but there are lots of Nelson Cruz for Joe Ryan comparables here. -
# of Starters used at least 2 times by each AL team so far in 2026 5 - CLE 6 - SEA 7 - TEX 8 - A's, BOS 9 - BAL, DET, KC, NYY 10 - LAA, MIN, TOR 11 - CHW, HOU, TB Looking at guys that have started at least once tells a similar story, but doing it this way removed some openers from the analysis.
-
Only partially related... Cleveland has had the same 5 starters all year. Literally. There's not a single game started for them outside of those 5 dudes. Can you freaking imagine? What a luxury.
-
This isn't a Liriano 2006 situation where you can't live without him in your rotation. He's been as good as could reasonably hope, but his production in the rotation is replaceable for relatively cheap on the trade market. Getting him through the season feeling good is priority #1.
-
It looks like, assuming his blister issue has cleared up, he will have two more starts before the trade deadline. I'd say you use those two starts (and the team's success between now and then) to determine if you think you need to trade for a #4 starter at the deadline. It's not reasonable to expect him to be a "normal" starter through the end of the season. Picking up a mid to back end rotation piece at the deadline allows you to do what you probably SHOULD do, which is to let him start normally for his next 3-4 starts then shift him to the bullpen. Given the choice, of adding a 7th inning reliever at the deadline, or adding a 4th starter and making Prielipp a 7th inning guy for the rest of the season, I'd take the latter (I'd also add another reliever).
-
How Soon Could Vahn Lackey Reach the Majors?
Whammy replied to Sam Caulder's topic in Twins Minor League Talk
Sure, but this is a "discussion board", not a "concise conclusion board"- 46 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- vahn lackey
- ryan jeffers
- (and 3 more)
-
Who knows what the QO looks like after the new CBA, or if it exists at all, but one thing I’ve been thinking about is the idea that you’d almost never give a QO to a catcher or a relief pitcher, because it’s so much higher that the AAV those positions typically get in free agency. What if they changed it to be more like the NFL and the franchise tag. The mechanics of baseball’s Qualifying Offer could work the same as it does now, but the one year contract value could vary based on position. I believe in the NFL the franchise tag contract value is equal to the average of the top 5 salaries at that position. I don’t think top 5 is the right answer for MLB. Maybe it’s top 3 or maybe top 5 + 30%. And I don’t think you need to get TOO specific on the position. Maybe it’s 5 categories of IF, OF, C/DH, SP, RP
-
I gave MLB too much credit. The Twins play the A’s twice pretty early and don’t play the White Sox at all until the middle of June
-
I wonder if they set it up so that you get at least 2 series against all division opponents and 1 series against all AL opponents in, say, the last 100 games that are scheduled. That would be smart for eventual tiebreaker possibilities and strength of schedule balancing if they miss a big chunk of games.
-
Pretty ideal from an attendance perspective, other than Milwaukee coming to town just after Labor Day Hosting each of the Yankees, Red Sox, Blue Jays, and Cubs over a 5 week stretch starting in late June is pretty sweet
-
My (perhaps flawed) assumption has been that velocity declines with age because it’s largely strength-based, although I think more recently perhaps we’ve seen that mechanics play a bigger role than previously though. But when it comes to spin, I’ve always thought of that as more technique driven, or at the very least driven by much less powerful muscles/tendons, so not nearly as affected by age deterioration. That could be 100% be a flawed way to think about it though.
-
I've never really thought of "spin" as something that declines with age. Maybe it does. No idea. I'd love to see some data on that.
-
OK. I'll mark you down as "not open to feedback" Your hall pass is revoked. Get back to class or I'll report you to the office.
-
I'll admit, I was being a little extreme by throwing out 5 years. but there's never been a situation where teams are potentially this far out of compliance from what the new baseline might be. I think there's very little chance there wont be some sort of phase-in. I also think the players will fight as much as possible to prevent a cap and as part of what might be their eventual concession on that item, they will likely negotiate as long of a phase in as possible for the cap and as short of a phase in as possible for a floor.
-
I just don't believe that no matter what salary cap/floor changes are put in place with a new CBA that the compliance deadline will be short enough to trigger this whirlwind you describe I could see the cap having a 5 year phase in to compliance and the floor having something shorter like a 2 year phase in. That's just one of the major changes being talked about that will need some sort of phasing in or grandfathering in (arbitration length and existing contracts being the most prominent)
-
Terrifying
-
Very tough to pull off, but something like this three act play could be interesting: 1. Trade Joe Ryan 2. Trade for Sonny Gray 3. Extend Pablo The timing of #3 isn’t super important other than to soothe the minds of fans Sorry… I’m off topic from the thread. 84-80 - 3rd wild card - Culpepper is called up around Aug 1 and has an 830 OPS - Two good RP added at trade deadline - Joe Ryan not traded and 4th in Cy Young voting - Buxton 6th in MVP voting.
- 25 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- awards
- transactions
- (and 2 more)
-
The $10M buyout just feels like part of the negotiation with the Red Sox. The Twins eating all of that would mean much less prospect capital being given up because $20M (what he’s owed this year + the 10M buyout) probably slides him into negative value territory.
-
In the early days of the QO (I’m not even sure it was called that), the signing team literally had to give their pick to the team losing the player. At this point I feel like we are on about the 4th iteration of what the signing team gives up and losing team receives, to the point where it feels like the only thing left to do is to completely do away with the penalty for the signing team. Maybe you could do something like the signing team drops 10 spots or something, depending on their tax status (but will “tax status” even be a thing in the next CBA?) And maybe you create a tier above the $50M level…. $150M or more get you to the 20th pick instead of 30th or so? But all of that sounds more complicated than “let’s just get rid of the draft pick penalty”
-
A team can be given a compensatory pick without another team losing one.
-
Maybe he's been brought up in this thread and it was just a post I skimmed over, but an extension for Pablo seems way more likely that Joe. Don't get me wrong, I'd love to have them both beyond 2027, anchoring the rotation, with some combination of Taj, Abel, Prielipp, and Zebby filling it out. You pair that with a lineup that is good now (with a little smoke and mirrors) but looks to be building towards a young, fun 2027/28 and you've got a team that you don't have to squint to see having good sustainable success. But I just don't see both Pablo and Joe both being around past 2027. And based on the AAV and years that it might take, I view Pablo as a more likely, lower cost, lower risk extension candidate.
-
And to add a little flavor to this... Any QO decisions from teams have to be made by about November 5th (depends on what day the Worlds Series ends) and then the decision from the player needs to be made within 10 days of that. So those things would happen prior to a lockout. I know that doesn't affect the MAIN topic of this thread (Joe Ryan) but it does affect someone who's been brought up several times here (Ryan Jeffers)
-
We could also DFA him. Seems as likely as an extension. 😜
-
I actually think everything about the QO process works pretty damn well.... other than the part where the signing team has to give up a draft pick. If they got rid of that provision, I'm not sure how the players would view the QO process as a bad thing.
