Jump to content
Our first free agents ranking has launched, click here to see the top 40+ names in free agency! ×
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

ashbury

Verified Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    42,497

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    471

 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

2026 Minnesota Twins Draft Tracker: Picks & Bonuses

Forums

Blogs

Events

Store

Downloads

Gallery

Everything posted by ashbury

  1. ashbury
    *shrug* That's probably so. I just thought it was more pointed in the case of Vavra than average. Maybe not.
  2. ashbury
    I agree you shouldn't sign a guy just as a "make up" for a previous mistake. You sign him because the previous mistake (if such it be) caused you to rethink your reasoning.
  3. ashbury
    I'd go along with this (as well as being surprised if they actually reached that kind of conclusion on him). Talent evaluation, in all its manifestations, is the single most important thing a front office must do. You can be lousy at negotiating contracts, and so forth, but if you can get the evaluations basically all right, you'll be OK. Easier said than done, I know.
  4. ashbury
    Try going to a 49ers or Giants fan site and talk about "Frisco". Anyway, Neil Allen sounds like an asset for the pitching staff, and should be the source of entertaining articles every now and then as well, as the legend of his off-field exploits also continues to grow.
  5. ashbury
    There's that case of beer that goes to the last moderator standing. Nobody would risk that by getting banned for a crummy joke.
  6. ashbury
    I thought there was a lot of complaining by fans about the hitting, when Vavra was coaching that.
  7. ashbury
    Enjoy your Thanksgiving turkeys. / add punctuation to suit
  8. ashbury
    Unless I'm misremembering, Jamey Carroll pinch-ran for him once in the late innings, and not in an obvious injury situation. That's all I need to know about his baserunning. Jamey. 39 Years Old. Carroll. While a team-friendly contract can be a trade inducement, I'm not really keen on giving an average long-term contract to someone who may soon be trade bait. I don't think Plouffe is as much of an asset at third as Dozier is at second. Given the specific proposal Seth offered, I'd keep it year to year with him, while perhaps being a little more friendly/flexible in the arb negotiation than is absolutely necessary. As others have said, front load it a little more, so that when trade time came the remaining contract was more of a bargain, and maybe my thinking would change.
  9. ashbury
    Ah, the old "don't make the first call" gambit. That has a familiar ring1 to it... 1No pun intended. And yet, there it is.
  10. ashbury
    Agreed, and my actual preference is to go after mid-level talent, priced around $10M, up to the payroll budget that management says isn't even ... oh never mind, this isn't about Hamels now.
  11. ashbury
    All the moderators satisfy your criterion. Am I sure? Why, I'm positive!
  12. ashbury
    Having asked for mutual respect, I'll now take off my moderator's cap and agree that (IMO) it's problematic to consider trading multiple top prospects for Hamels, as the original poster in this thread suggested and the discussion has evolved. I took a look at the MLBTR thread about Hamels, and I see that even the Phillies FO has backed off from this demand (if indeed they ever expected so much): A team source rejected the prevailing view that Philadelphia is asking potential trade partners for two or three of their best prospects. Instead, the team has been in a stance of asking for offers on their star lefty. http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2014/11/latest-on-cole-hamels-2.html Does that change the terms of this present discussion sufficiently? Would you trade a top prospect (read Buxton or Sano, probably) plus a couple of throw-ins, for Hamels? I still would not; as I said before, if I found Hamels' contract palatable, I'd instead go after an even higher priced FA and keep my prospects. But it's not preposterous to mull it.
  13. ashbury
    Moderator's note: Please make your points without blatant disrespect for others who do not share your view. The fact that a Hamels trade is being discussed on MLBTR suggests there is room for varying opinion.
  14. ashbury
    Given an either/or choice like this, I'll steal a page from Chief and say "Yes". And then in a couple of years, if (not necessarily when) there is a logjam of talent at that position, you can trade from strength to address a need at that time. Talent is worth having in the reservoir, as well as in the pipeline. I'd feel differently (about how to add to the reservoir) if there wasn't significant slack in the annual payroll. And I'm not saying to spend just for the sake of spending. If the Twins FO feels that Tomas won't be tradeable halfway into the kind of contract necessary to sign him, because the talent level isn't there, then I'm fine with not going after him. Talent evaluation is paramount.
  15. ashbury
    Twinkie, please.
  16. ashbury
    One of us will have to infract the other if this turns into a lengthy tangent. But I think forecasting has improved a lot in the past couple of decades, at least for teams who give it a serious go, and while you can't predict individually which player will suffer an injury or will simply flame out, the smart money can decide which side to come down on a lot better than before, on where players will be in a couple of years. Apologies in advance if I'm overstating what you mean by "completely guessing"
  17. ashbury
    Right now, with the changing of the guard on the coaching side, is not when I'd make a trade of an advanced prospect, since you mention Meyer specifically. Let Allen and Guardado form their opinions which probably will take all spring. Of course no one is off the table if the offer is good enough, and it comes down to the Twins' talent evaluators to decide that for me. That the Twins have "invested" a lot in Meyer isn't by itself a reason to not trade. But I'm more of the opinion that we should be acquiring talent via free agency - if we are willing to take on a contract of the size of Hamels', we should stretch farther for one of the top guys that cost no players in return. I'd feel differently if the payroll were closer to the assumed maximum. One thing I do like about a proposal like this is that it reverses the direction of recent trades where we receive multiple suspects instead of one good prospect (though Eduardo Escobar has panned out). The Meyer trade being an exception to that pattern.
  18. ashbury
    If they have an acquisition in mind, such as a Rule 5 player, then the timing doesn't really matter.
  19. ashbury
    There are very few trades I'd be interested in, at this stage of the rebuild. And this is not one of them. Talent acquisition, not talent reallocation, is where the focus should remain IMO.
  20. ashbury
    This guy will do the thinnin' around here: http://cdn2-b.examiner.com/sites/default/files/styles/image_content_width/hash/c3/a2/c3a26331fda02703c6194105d483f71a.jpg?itok=E-KDqhtF
  21. ashbury
    One infraction point to the Kia Tigers for posting without respect for others.
  22. ashbury
    I'm guessing Martin will get snapped up before the Twins' turn to pick. / edit: Now have read the BA article. Seems big league scouts disagree. I'll leave the post there anyway.
  23. ashbury
    The Twins waited until Mauer was ready and they intended to have him on the 25-man roster, before they traded AJ. It didn't seem to hurt AJ's trade value - the return looked good at the time as well as in hindsight. And if you think Plouffe's inherent value is shakier than AJ's was, so you should trade him now, well, 29 other GMs probably will think the same way too.
  24. ashbury
    In keeping with the theme of reporting yesterday's news: SPOILER ALERT!
  25. ashbury
    I enjoyed the gentle hazing/razzing of a couple of players who seemed to have acquired the reputation for a big head, as well. I'm going to sound like an idiot for saying this, but the overall tone reminded me of my beer-league softball days.1 Guys are guys, I guess. 1And no, no team I was ever on played for a championship of any type. What. So. Ever.
×
×
  • Create New...