Jump to content
Our free agent ranking is up to 100 names, and now you can filter by player position! Click here to check it out! ×
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

drivlikejehu

Verified Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    2,284

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

 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 drivlikejehu

  1. drivlikejehu
    Sure, but TJ is not a positive. Things would be different if he had always been 100% healthy (starting with the fact the Twins wouldn't have been able to draft him if he had no question marks before the draft). The distinction between a "#3" or "#4" etc. is definitely somewhat arbitrary... what I expressed in general was the view that his ceiling is limited and that he's more of an innings eater than difference maker. Of course that's just my opinion, not fact, and I hope to be wrong. But at some point, if the Twins are going to contend and hopefully be in the playoffs, they will need top of rotation starters. I thought Gibson had #2 potential but it didn't work out.
  2. drivlikejehu
    I was going by xFIP-, not ERA, in terms of assessing his 2014 stats. Coming up at a later age is not really a positive, from a historical trend standpoint. But regardless, the point with Gibson is that's he's a #4 starter at best, which is fine but not really helpful in terms of turning around the pitching staff.
  3. drivlikejehu
    Not really: http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/pitcher-aging-curves-introduction/ There is a decent chance that 2014 was actually Gibson's peak.
  4. drivlikejehu
    Well you can't only look at qualified starters and then say everyone else is worse than a 4.00. Setting the screen to 100 IP for 2014 returns 140 starters; of those, Gibson's xFIP- was 85th (his xFIP was 3.99 but xFIP- adjusts for home park and league). Being a little below average isn't the worst thing, but it's not a real valuable commodity either, especially as he reaches arbitration and his salary rises.
  5. drivlikejehu
    Gibson's swinging strike rate is 7% (last year: 8.8%), which is subpar but nowhere near as low as his strikeout rate. So part of the dramatic decline is probably a fluke. Whether his current 2015 ERA is "lucky" is to some extent a debate over semantics. The concern has to do with future results, which is certainly an issue given Gibson's problems putting guys away and limiting walks. Keep in mind, an ERA of 4.00 isn't that good anymore, even for a starter. So if that's Gibson's true ability, which appears optimistic at this stage, he still isn't a building block for the rotation. Note that his current ERA - xFIP gap would be larger than any on record for a full season.
  6. drivlikejehu
    There is no question Gibson has been lucky, it's just a matter of degree. Maybe he 'deserves' an ERA of 4.50 instead of 5.00, due to his ability to induce weak contact. Either way, his ERA is going to go up for sure unless he increases strikeouts and/or decreases walks.
  7. drivlikejehu
    Rosario not starting against A's right-hander Chavez. Looking more and more like a motivational play by management to get Rosario hungry once he is back in AAA.
  8. drivlikejehu
    I think there's zero chance the Twins send Arcia down at this point. He has proven he can dominate AAA and he needs to develop his game in the Majors. If Rosario gets hot and they want to keep him, he could play CF.
  9. drivlikejehu
    I had forgotten about the 2017 club option... I take it back, those four wouldn't be an overpayment. But if a decent starter prospect was swapped in for Burdi, I don't think it would be a joke or anything. Probably though Milwaukee would want one elite prospect as part of the deal, instead of several solid guys.
  10. drivlikejehu
    Berrios, Gordon, Polanco, and Burdi would be a massive overpayment for Lucroy. Milwaukee would accept that on the spot.
  11. drivlikejehu
    There's no question that the Twins have been completely incompetent in their handling of Hicks. The problem with your argument is that, regardless of how long the Twins wait, there is no guarantee Hicks will immediately produce upon returning to the Majors. Even a good, consistent player can have rough stretches. If Hicks comes up and doesn't really hit for a couple weeks, what difference will it make that he (yet again) had performed well in the minors? Either he can handle it mentally, or he can't. Playing well in Rochester will do nothing for him in that regard, anymore than his previous minor league success did in 2013 and 2014 with the Twins. He's 25, he's not the centerfielder of the future anymore, and he's clearly shown he can hit minor league pitching over the years. If he can't cut in the Bigs, so be it... but I don't see any reason to think the damage the Twins have done can be reversed by hanging out in the International League.
  12. drivlikejehu
    Hicks had a RC+ of 84 last year, Rosario's was 83; Hicks did it in the Majors, Rosario in AA. The latter is a far more spectacular failure. For whatever reason, Hicks has been a favored whipping boy for the Twins organization and many fans. Other players make "mental mistakes" all the time but catch little or no heat for it. Rosario himself has had issues beyond his lackluster performance. For a temporary call up, I can see the argument against promoting Hicks, but the quoted post is hyperbolic in its criticism of Hicks and far removed from reality.
  13. drivlikejehu
    I'm not super persuaded by the argument that, seeing as the Twins have incompetently handled Hicks' development for 2+ years, they now are obviously correct to keep him in AAA despite the fact he's playing well. Maybe the better explanation is that they still are incompetently handling his career.
  14. drivlikejehu
    No, those are the stats in his favor, barely, from 2+ years ago. The "fail" is a RC+ of 83 in AA for 2014 and 88 this year in AAA. Both of those qualify easily.
  15. drivlikejehu
    Does Gregory Polanco and his OPS of .762 not count? Rosario trailed three 20-year olds in AA, Polanco at 21, and was basically equal to three other 21-year olds once park factors are taken into account (Flores, Austin, Suarez). Among the youngest players in the league, he didn't stand out at all.
  16. drivlikejehu
    He was average. And in 2014 in AA, and now 2015 in AAA, he has been far below average. Last year, Hicks outperformed Rosario's translated AA line by a lot.
  17. drivlikejehu
    Rosario's AFL performance was almost exactly league average. His 2013 AA performance was also right around league average. True, he was 21, but for an alleged top prospect that isn't out of the ordinary. Noting that he could have a lucky streak isn't much of an argument... that could be used to justify almost any move.
  18. drivlikejehu
    What has Rosario done except fail at AA & AAA instead of the Majors?
  19. drivlikejehu
    Rosario has never had success above A-ball. He's 23, so it's not like he's especially young for a prospect, either. His reputation far exceeds his results... I understand that it's for two weeks, but I thought the Twins were trying to win? He doesn't give them the best chance to do so.
  20. drivlikejehu
    I don't get it. The better move would have been to call up Hicks, first to fill in for Arcia, and then to take over CF.
  21. drivlikejehu
    OK, let's take a look then: "1. Pick up some guys to keep the beer and hot dogs selling (you can agree or disagree if these were the guys you wanted, but they were purchased)." This would be a marketing strategy, not a plan to win. Since winning is what leads to increased attendance, that would be a rather horrible plan, considering the fact that guys like Stauffer and Santana have zero impact on "beer and hot dogs" being sold. "2. Watch the development of the minors for some mid to late-season calls ups." All teams do this every year, it's not a "plan" anymore than the Twins "plan" to play 162 games. "3. Tread water near .500." That is a hope/wish, not a plan. "4. Likely be out of the playoff hunt, and if all goes okay, trade Milone, Hunter, Stauffer, Boyer, and any other marginal player, if possible." If they are near .500, would they be out of the hunt? That doesn't make sense. But also, none of those guys have trade value, so that would be a bad plan regardless. "5. September: Call up youth (keep the hot dogs and beer selling even though the season is over)." All teams do this every year. "6. 2016: Sell hope for the future." The Twins marketing dept. has been doing this for years. Unfortunately, only wins can get the job done.
  22. drivlikejehu
    I don't see what evidence there is that the Twins really have a plan or that, to the extent they did have one, the current season is conforming to it. It's a long season. You don't get a prize for being .500 in May. Of course it beats getting off to a bad start, but we've been down this road before.
  23. drivlikejehu
    Maybe 'underdog' would have been the better way to describe it, but no, I don't think long relievers face the same degree of pressure as closers.
  24. drivlikejehu
    He should be up. There's a very good chance he makes the Twins a better team. Will he reach the ceiling the Twins drafted him for? No. That ship has sailed. But he can contribute and they may as well start carving out a role for him.
  25. drivlikejehu
    That 100% health and forkball have propelled him to an xFIP of 4.92 on the year. That's barely 5th starter level, if anything. It's a wonder his career xFIP is 4.55 without the benefit of that newfound fork.
×
×
  • Create New...