Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account


Provisional Member
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


ThejacKmp last won the day on September 11 2018

ThejacKmp had the most liked content!

About ThejacKmp

  • Birthday April 6

ThejacKmp's Achievements

  1. Halladay got in first ballot. Johan was off the ballot and didn't come close to even hitting 5%. 700 innings is the difference? ​It's not pitching, it's regionalism and the myth of the tragic demise. Halladay doesn't belong in first ballot by the standards the BBWA sets. Johan and Halladay both deserved a longer discussion and guys like Mussina going in would have helped their cause.
  2. Roy Halladay is an overwhelming first ballot Hall of Famer in the esteemed eye of the BBWA. And Johan Santana wasn't worth a vote last year by Mr. Stark or any other prominent media member of the BBWA who have published their ballots. That’s total crap. Here are the two guys’ peaks: Halladay peak 2002 to 2011: 148 ERA+, 170 K/year, 1.11 WHIP, 3.12 FIP, 219 IP Santana peak 2002 to 2010: 150 ERA+, 198 K/year, 1.08 WHIP, 3.27 FIP, 198 IP Halladay pitched more innings but that makes Santana's K's even more impressive (9.0 K/9 vs. 7.0 K/9). The awards are similar. The peak is not quick, it's 8-9 years. I’m not saying that Halladay wasn’t better – there’s value to doing it longer and Halladay likely wins on that. But its narrow and to not even discuss Santana but view Halladay as a shoo-in? Ridiculous. Halladay was arguably not the best pitcher during his peak, Santana was. And even that longevity is suspect. Halladay pitched in five other seasons and Santana in three. Here are those numbers: Halladay non-peak: 87 ERA+, 70K/year, 1.45 WHIP, 4.36 FIP, 92.1 IP Santana non-peak: 82 ERA+, 67K/year, 1.53 WHIP, 4.64 FIP, 82 IP While Halladay comes out better, those numbers are not markedly different. So the difference between HOF Halladay and One Ballot Johan is that Halladay pitched parts of five other seasons where he was a slightly better below-average pitcher? That’s crap and begs the question why the two guys, from the same era, are viewed differently. There are two answers to that: (1) Halladay gets the attention because of his tragic demise, which is a stupid and false narrative. Tragic demises should be irrelevant to the HOF unless the player was on a humanitarian mission that robbed him of a chunk of his career - like Roberto Clemente. An Roy Halladay decidedly wasn't on a humanitarian mission and should actually be castigated for the manner of his death. Roy Halladay died when he crashed his private plane while high on a morphine and methamphetamine speedball. He could have killed someone, it's no different than drunk driving. Would we feel so bad if that plane had landed on someone's house and killed a kid? Decidedly not a tragic death in any sense that matters to the Hall discussion. Even stranger, the BBWA didn't consider Santana blowing out his arm when he was near the top of his game tragic. While trivial in the real world sense, Santana's tragedy is more applicable from a HOF stance: Santana was robbed of the chance for a strong mid 30s peak while we know Halladay didn’t have that in him because we watched him shrivel, retire, and then start piloting planes while high. Yet Halladay is somehow more tragic? ​(2) Halladay succeeded on the East Coast while Santana was injured in his time on the East Coast. The BBWA pays better attention to smaller markets today with the dawn of social media and fantasy baseball but the 2000s were a period when the East Coast dominated the national discourse. Johan's excellence with the Twins slipped under the radar to an extent (and cost him at least one Cy Young) while Halladay was always in big markets and got the headlines. Santana also got hurt with the Mets when he did head to a big market, further tainting his legacy in the pea-sized minds of the BBWA. Its regionalism and sensationalism and its crap. I'd just like one of these baseball writers to man up and say "We got last year wrong." Fat chance but it would be nice to hear after three months of “Halladay is a shoo-in” while the 2nd greatest Twins player of the past 25 years remains unheralded.
  3. Wow. Let’s break this down. It doesnt matter how old you are, how long you've had your job, or where you came from, to come off as smug , elitist, and arrogant is never going to win over many real fans. I’ve never seen anything that says that they’re smug, elitist and arrogant. Do you have any examples to prove this? They seem to be consummately nice in media appearances and if they were elitist, they wouldn’t have come to the Twins. My belief is that you (and a section of the Twins Daily audience) is projecting anger at a whole series of baseball and non-baseball changes onto Flavine. The rise of analytics and the scientization/questioning of the traditional truths in sports and society is threatening because it means the way you see the world/sport may not be accurate. It’s easier to lash out at a symbol of that change than explore and then accept/reject the shifting changes. Also, anytime someone talks about “real fans”, I groan a bit inside. We’re all real fans, there’s no reason to claim that you’re somehow better than other people. The mom who loves taking her kids but doesn’t know who is warming up in the bullpen is a real fan. The little kid who checks the box score every day because he can’t stay up late is a real fan. Aaron Gleeman, who loves breaking down statistics the same way the FO does, is a real fan. Stop trying to create tiers of fandom. The way they handled the trading of Escobar completely infuriated me. I have had long term friends from New York to Los Angeles tell me that they never thought they would see the Minnesota Twins pull such bush league move. My god. They traded a player to a playoff team! The inhumanity! Did your friend from New York think the Yankees were bush league when they traded Chapman to the Cubs? And when the Angels traded players at the deadline in 2015 and 2016? Every team in baseball does this when they have a bad season. The Twins have done it before. Stop acting like the Escobar trade was unusual. They told Escobar they were shopping him, it was widely reported he would go somewhere, and then it happened. He was sad to leave the Twins but excited to go into a pennant race. If he performs well there, it will only help his free agency as he’ll be performing on a big stage. You must be infuriated by all baseball moves? Did anyone see the post game interview by Ervin Santana after (probably his last game) he pitched in Detroit? He mentions how they are trying to do their job and win games but its hard when every day another one of their important pieces are taken from them. Dozier used to pull this too. Ervin did nothing to contribute to the team this year, calling out management for doing what’s best for the team when the players have not performed is pretty ridiculous. The next day it was announced he was shut down for the year due to recurring injury complications.That was Bull. 12 hours earlier he was telling reporters how it was getting better and better with each outing. At the very least he should have been able to get some innings in and at least audition for a trade or a 2019 deal. Santana wasn’t shut down because he said something. He was shut down because he is hurt. He has received injections on his finger because it’s not healed. It would actually be BS for the Twins to force him to pitch in the hope that he’d have trade value. They did what was best for the player – shut him down so he’ll be healthy for next season, even if it’s not with the Twins. Pretty cold hearted and inhuman huh? Also these young guys are going to think twice about staying here after they've seen first hand what happened to guys like Dozier and Escobar. If you really think that this is the first time the young guys have seen that baseball players move teams, I don’t know what to say to you. They’ve seen guys traded in the minors and Dozier is far from the first veteran to move about. They hung out with Lynn and Morrison this year, they know guys move. The Twins traded Dozier and Escobar to playoff teams where they can chase a ring. That isn’t some awful thing that was done and Escobar at least was grateful for the opportunity. Dozier whined but that’s because he didn’t get his contract (which would be a terrible contract BTW, another victory for the whiz kids!) I even get Dozier whining since he would’ve cashed in if he’d hit the market a year ago and looks ready for a tough free agency. I don’t think it’s the way I’d handle it but I get his sentiments. Just don’t think I’d blame the front office which (A.) made the right call not to trade him and (B.) did what every other team would do in its place and traded him when the Twins didn’t compete to (C.) a playoff team where a late-season surge would help Dozier more than if it was happening for the moribund Twins. These kind of amateurish first year executive moves arent going to go unnoticed among the Twins players or players on other teams. So Yeah i do think that the Dynamic Duo sees themselves as the kings of the world, accountable to nobody. These are veteran executive moves that have been utilized time and again to build good teams. The Cubs and Astros did it. The Braves did it. The Phillies didn’t with Howard/Utley/Co. and ended up in a five year rebuild. And again, you need to provide more evidence of their lack of accountability and smugness – just asserting something doesn’t make it true. “Donald Trump quit Twitter!” Nope. Not true. Even though I said it.
  4. Are you older than 7? Because those early 2010s teams were pretty awful too. Or was there a valuable core there as well that I'm forgetting? I also think you're forgetting the mid to late 90s. The Twins had nothing like Buxton/Sano/Kepler/Rosario/Polanco/Garver/Berrios/Romero/Gonsalves/Buesnitz back then. Escobar 2018 >>> Escobar 2016. Rosario 2018 >>>> Rosario 2016. Kepler 2018 has the same stats as 2016 Kepler and is still 25 - the upside is still there. You're right that Buxton/Sano have regressed but neither is by any means done. Dozier is gone. I'd agree that 2018 position players are not as exciting as 2016 but that's mostly because the unknown is exciting and has a higher ceiling. And the pitching is where it's totally different. 2016 Santana was good but the rest of the staff was Hot Garbage Gibson, Duffey 2.0, Hughes, Tommy Milone, Ricky Nolasco. The Twins of 2018 have so much more upside: Great Gibson, Berrios, Romero, Gonsalves, even Odorizzi. And that's not even getting into the pen. The 2018 Twins pen is up-and-down but there's more upside now than there was in 2016 - go look at those names and get excited. I'd take the 2018 Twins situation over the 2016 Twins situation in a heart-beat. Pitching is way harder to find than a few patches in the lineup.
  5. The negativity down the stretch is crazy. People wanted to play the young 'uns but are surprised when they aren't all-stars and when the Twins lose as a result. Not saying that Gonsalves will be the next Romero or that Astudillo is the next Al Newman but you're getting what you wanted and there is that chance. If it doesn't taste good, you shouldn't have ordered it.
  6. Yep. Number3 quoted you and said he agreed and the elaborated. Seemed fair to tackle both posts since they built on one another.
  7. The lesson from unpredictability is not "give up". 2018 is not the only thing to take a lesson from - what about 2017 when they surprised and made the playoffs? We should take no lessons from that? Why is 2018 more instructive than 2017? The Twins are not a team that should be going all-in but they aren't a team that needs to rebuild. There's no reason that they can't be next year's A's or Rays (after all, the Rays and A's are last year's Twins). They need to put a solid team on the field next year while preserving payroll and resources for the future. That's pretty doable if they (A) Sign a 2B from the glut of FA options ( augment at DH/corner OF/1B and © sign some high-upside veteran starting pitching like Ervin. There's no reason to give up, especially since the return for Odorizzi and Castro would be minimal.
  8. 1.) I mean, you do realize that the Rangers and Indians already had GMs right? That the way you become a GM is you come up under someone good and then other teams that don't have good GMs hire the assistants of good GMs to see if they can replicate that good work. You get that right? That's how the system works. If they were still working for the Rangers and Indians it would be because they weren't any good and no one else wanted them. 2.) The Rangers are a bad team because they kept trying to be middle-of-the-pack. And the Indians have a long history of trading away players to rebuild/retool. 3.) Yes, we should totally judge front offices by one game. That's the only fair way. Though I think you're not going far enough. We should judge them on one inning. Or maybe one batter? How about one pitch? Here's another hint. If you're using phrases like "whiz kids" pejoratively, you're probably not making a reasoned argument.
  9. Did you say the same things last year when the Twins were on their way to the playoffs? Were you complaining about them being numbers? I love how 90% of the board has swallowed "The Front Office Sees Players As Numbers" hook line and sinker with no evidence. Like we never even validated that claim. Being analytical is not the same thing as being inhuman. I'm pretty sure that Flavine are just as human as TR, who also made hard decisions like trading AJ and Dougie when the time was right. A hint: when you sound like a gasbag retired player complaining about how these kids don't know how to play like you did in the old days, it's perhaps time to dial it back a notch.
  10. There is so much in this that is reflexively negative. 1.) The 40 man roster is bad now because the Twins sold at the deadline. It’s supposed to be bad after that. You try random guys, you bring in mid-season free agents. Judge the Twins 40 man by the beginning of the year (talented!) or the beginning of next year (TBD but talented and augmented!) 2.) Worst in your lifetime? Are you two years old? Because the Twins teams of the early 2010s were undeniably worse, top to bottom. The 2016 team lost 103 games with Robbie Grossman as their second best hitter. The starting pitchers had a 5.39 ERA. If you think this year’s team is worse, you’re suffering from delusions. Unless you have some actual evidence to back up the absurd claims? 3.) I think people overestimate the ability to sign long-term contracts for young players. Yes Evan Longoria signed a deal but that doesn’t happen every day. Most of the Twins better young players have already signed decent contracts when they were drafted/signed. They have a nest egg and have every incentive to wait for free agency. There’s also value in waiting – this year’s Buxton season would be way more disappointing if you were paying him $8-10 million. Same with Sano. I’m for signing long-term deals with guys but I’m not naïve enough to think it’s easy to do or to blindly criticize a process about which I have no information. 4.) Do you really think that the front office isn’t involved in lineup construction? Molitor makes the decisions but I’m positive that they are weighing in and having a dialogue. You’re trying to create a fire where there is none. Stop it. 5.) I predict that you will never have to answer for the absurdity of that Orioles prediction. I’m going to try to remember it for next year but will almost certainly forget. I wish I could bet large sums of money with you on this (and am willing to). The Twins are a team that was in the playoffs last year, had a down year but still a lot of great pieces, and have a top 5-10 farm system with top-end talent to augment the current core. The Orioles are a historically bad team that sold off its top-end talent, has terrible contracts to veterans, and has a bottom ten system that lacks any high-end talent. They will almost certainly be a bottom-feeding team next year. 6.) You think the Twins have no hope for 2019? Are you crazy? I’m not saying they’re going to be favorites but let’s take the negativity down a notch or nine. The Twins have a good core of young pitching, solid upside pieces at six different positions (RF, LF, CF, 3B, SS, C), the payroll to address areas of concern (pitching, DH, 2B, maybe 1B), and are still in a terrible division (KC will be worse, Detroit is bottoming out, Chicago is still a few years away). There is every reason to have hope for next year, even before offseason moves. C’mon. You’re being negative just to be negative. This isn’t Sportscenter, we don’t need hot takes. We need reasoned discussion. Work in some figures or evidence or analysis to support your rantings. Otherwise it’s really hard to take you seriously.
  11. The Lynn and Odorizzi contracts aren't anathema to a rebuilding effort - they really blocked no one, especially with Santana being injured and the young starters being predictably up and down. Those were short term moves to keep the team competitive. And I don't think it's a rebuild and I'd be surprised if you could find the FO saying it is. This has been a retool and rightfully so. The Twins have the pieces to be competitive - it just didn't work out this year. They should be working for short term veteran moves that give the team a chance now while preserving resources for an upswing in the next few years.
  12. I'm not sure it's fair to compare the Twins to the Athletics and the Rays based on this year. Over the last three years, the A's averaged 70 wins and the Rays 76. Things happened to pop for the Rays and A's this year and they happened to pop for the Twins last year. Especially in a year where the Twins had so many issues with injuries and effectiveness that Oakland seems like it's gotten it easy (and they haven't). We need a broader perspective than this year. And that pertains to a lot of the grousing about the Twins. We get it, this year went poorly. But overall this organization has an excellent farm system featuring some exciting players approaching or in the high minors, a solid MLB core, and payroll flexibility to augment weak areas. This glass is 3/4 full people.
  13. That's not true. It's easy to know what Joe Mauer is thinking. He's thinking about milk.
  14. He's not too good a hitter to sit half the year. He's got a 102 OPS+, he's an average hitter. The kind who are fringe backups for good teams. However, for a catcher he's a very good hitter. I think the argument should more be getting him to work his way into the lion's share of the catching minutes next year, even though Castro has the platoon advantage. I have no problem with this year's lineup coming back. The Twins had everything go wrong (Morrison injured/bad, Mauer concussed, Polanco 'roiding, Buxton hurt/sucking, Sano out of shape/bad, Castro injured, Dozier terrible) but it still was a good lineup on paper. Buxton almost has to be better, Sano seems more dedicated to being ready to play, Morrison is gone, Polanco will get a full year, Castro/Garver is a nice platoon with some young upside, Austin is a huge upgrade on Grossman and provides righty pop. They need a better 2B (Escobar etc.) and could certainly beef up 1B via trade (free agency seems a dicey proposition) but overall, that's not a bad lineup. That lineup was great in 2017, just because it was bad in 2018 doesn't mean we should rip it up.
  15. Oh no one is guaranteeing Escobar comes back, he just makes sense and the Twins have money to spend. I'm confident that Escobar's market isn't going to be insane (he's had 1.5 good years) and he'll be in the Twins range. But regardless, they'll be in the 2B market because Gordon isn't ready. Sano should be an occasional 1B/DH/ His value is playing 3B. I think a strong argument can be made that the Twins should upgrade their utility IF but that's harder to do than it sounds. You tend to get Adrianza's because there's no guaranteed PT. Nick Gordon or Arraez might be a nice midseason upgrade at utility IF (playing 4-5 days a week if the Twins give rest and shift guys around and use defensive subs). No way you need to limit Mauer, look at that roster above. Yeah you can change out Adrianza or Escobar but assuming the Twins get a 2B and their utility infielder can play the regular utility positions, they have depth at all of the positions. They're perhaps a little heavy at 1B types but that doesn't mean they are deficient elsewhere. Well covered in the OF, decent starters in the IF (could upgrade Adrianza), and a decent amount of 1B/DH types so they can play matchups. If they get Cruz or Donaldson or Macahdo or Harper that's different but those seem unlikely for the most part.
  • Create New...