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
    The Mariners would never consider a trade like that... it's laughably lopsided.
  2. drivlikejehu
    He was never a dominant pitcher- that's what stands out relative to most members of the Hall. He was very good for an extremely long time. If he had pitched for the Twins, he would have finished with 250 wins and a worse ERA, and be viewed in a completely different light. Look at the difficulty Blyleven had getting in- and he demolishes Glavine in terms of WAR (FG or B-R) and most counting stats, trailing only by 15 wins. Context has traditionally played a huge role in Hall selections, and Glavine is a prime example.
  3. drivlikejehu
    You can try to configure the timelines in all kinds of ways. Regardless, there is no basis to argue that the previous rate of admissions is correct - it's just a matter of opinion. I think too many players are in (despite some worthy ones being left out). And either way, a quota system makes zero sense for picking HoF players.
  4. drivlikejehu
    Was he the 5th best pitcher, though? Looking at 1991-2002: Maddux, Johnson, Clemens and Martinez are clearly superior. The next tier would include Schilling, Brown, Mussina, Glavine, and Smoltz, with maybe Cone probably a half step down from that group. Schilling had a far stronger peak and far more dominant post-season performance. Smoltz had a stronger peak and went 15-4 in the postseason with a 2.67 ERA. In 1000 fewer innings he finished with 400 more strikeouts than Glavine. He had basically the same number of complete games in 200 fewer starts. So I think a very strong case can be made that Glavine was the 3rd best pitcher on his own team and maybe roughly tied for #7 with Mussina.
  5. drivlikejehu
    Did you not see him pitch? Glavine typically got an unbelievably wide strike zone; umpires at the time were calling outside pitches in general while not calling the top of the strike zone (MLB has made efforts in recent years to remedy this, with pitch tracking being a key component). But no one took advantage of it like Glavine, who quickly would find the furthest and lowest spot the ump would call, and then proceeded to throw 90%+ of his pitches to that exact spot. If he missed slightly he still got the benefit of the doubt. He was the epitome of Mazzone's 'never give in' philosophy, walking over 3 batters per 9 innings despite having perfect command of his pitches. Of course the Hall has members who only made it due to longevity. But all Glavine has is wins - his ERA, strikeouts, shutouts, etc. are not noteworthy. He pitched a full season's worth of playoffs, producing at the same level but going 14-16 against better competition.
  6. drivlikejehu
    I'm surprised Glavine is close to unanimous. I certainly wouldn't have him on my ballot this year and probably not ever. He didn't have a particularly impressive peak and basically is a lock purely due to longevity and playing for good teams (and thus getting 300 wins). And really his whole career was a byproduct of umpires giving him strikes on pitches 6-8 inches outside at the knees.
  7. drivlikejehu
    Franklin can't play SS in the Majors... he's not even particularly good at 2nd. The problem with the Cano contract is timing. The Mariners aren't very good right now - even with him they are a .500 team at best. So this basically forces them into going all-out to win immediately but with a good chance it still won't work. The money itself isn't totally crazy, once you account for the fact that the last few years are just deferred compensation. They aren't expecting Cano to produce much at age 40.
  8. drivlikejehu
    In the past 3 years, he's thrown 83, 35, and 45 innings (rounded). The idea he suddenly turns into a 150+ guys seem like pure fantasy to me. And how could a mid-market team give him a pricey extension even if he did do well for 2 years, knowing his history? The Twins need more pitching, but I don't see why someone would give up a good prospect for 2 years of very uncertain upside.
  9. drivlikejehu
    Yeah this isn't a horrible deal... contracts worse than this happen all the time. In a vacuum it's an overpay, but the Yankees aren't in a vacuum- there is a lot of pressure on the organization and it's dealing with uncertainty (e.g., A-Rod & Cano). They wanted to add a very good player quickly, and did so.
  10. drivlikejehu
    If Beane isn't a genius, I don't want to know what Ryan is. Beane's record is superior by orders of magnitude in comparison. He wins more and rebuilds better - never losing 90 games in 16 seasons. According to some here, that shouldn't even be possible, since Beane hasn't been able to get picks at the very top of the draft.
  11. drivlikejehu
    Very bizarre move by Colorado, to be honest. I hope Morneau stays healthy and produces for them, but what is going on with the Rockies? Basically giving Fowler away, and then signing someone they didn't need for what appears to be above-market dollars.
  12. drivlikejehu
    I wasn't in favor of signing him, though he is a useful player. He has a lifetime OPS of .599 against lefties and isn't the greatest defensively. There are just much bigger fish to fry considering Pinto is worth a look.
  13. drivlikejehu
    Wait, the GM's job is to tank so he can pick up high draft picks? So, signing Correia was actually a bad move because the Twins should have aimed for even more losses?
  14. drivlikejehu
    I dunno, is TR going to apologize to us for losing 96 games 2 years in a row?
  15. drivlikejehu
    Right now, 70 wins.
  16. drivlikejehu
    After adding Nolasco and Hughes, the Twins are a 90 loss team. Just goes to show how bad things were before they were signed, and how far left there is to go.
  17. drivlikejehu
    Clearly he would, and even more so than 3/24. The low AAV basically leverages the Twins' belief/hope he will pitch better away from New York; if that turns out to be true, they get 3 years on the cheap. Paying a higher AAV for fewer years would take away the upside without reducing the risk. I like the move because, while 2014 is a lost cause, it gives the Twins a potential asset for subsequent years when it might make a difference. They still should add another starter one way or another.
  18. drivlikejehu
    The Twins have too few starters, not too many. Junk-throwing AAAA filler doesn't count.
  19. drivlikejehu
    Hughes worries me from a durability and performance standpoint, but the question marks will keep his price down and he is young for a free agent. The key in my opinion is whether the deal would include a team-friendly option year, to cash in if Hughes does actually put it together finally.
  20. drivlikejehu
    Definitely a good move. It won't be hard for him to earn the contract if he mostly stays healthy. One pitcher certainly doesn't fix an entire rotation, of course (not that getting all the way there is even possible in one off-season). Hopefully we will see another couple moves, in free agency or via trade, to field a rotation potentially close to average.
  21. drivlikejehu
    I'm not sad the Twins missed out. Vargas is good for eating some innings at the back end of a solid rotation, but he's just not that far above replacement level. The Royals don't seem like all that great of a fit to me, though the contract itself is reasonable.
  22. drivlikejehu
    Looks like a reasonably fair deal, though I like it better for Detroit. In two years with the Tigers, Fielder has an overall ISO under .200. His offensive trendlines look bad pretty much across the board and he can't play defense. Throw age into the mix and he was untradeable without a massive subsidy. The Tigers did so directly by covering part of what he is owed and indirectly by taking Kinsler, who is a bit overpaid himself. He is reasonably useful though, and allows the Tigers much-needed payroll flexibility. I see why Texas traded Kinsler - just not sure why it was for a declining, overpaid DH.
  23. drivlikejehu
    Jason Marquis?
  24. drivlikejehu
    Well unless a decent number of Twins prospects pan out, they are screwed anyway and it's a moot point. Counting roster spots isn't a good way of looking at it. We know the Twins won't be spending anything on their backup position players and middle relievers (and quite possibly not even on late inning relievers). Then there are the inexpensive young players in starting roles. After that, and the 3 expensive contracts you stipulate, not many spots are left. But $30-40MM still is available in that scenario. Try actually putting together a projected roster where payroll becomes a problem. It isn't easy.
  25. drivlikejehu
    I'm not seeing the problem. Even if the Twins signed Garza for that much, and then signed a $20MM player, they would still be far under budget. Who else would be taking up payroll? Having said that, I don't think Garza will get that much. And if he does I don't think it would be from the Twins.
×
×
  • Create New...