Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

ashbury

Verified Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    40,822

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    462

 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

Forums

Blogs

Events

Store

Downloads

Gallery

Everything posted by ashbury

  1. ashbury
    Most of the time I'd opt to keep the superior player. If it's a question of truly elite talent at up the middle positions, with starting pitching as exactly in the middle as it gets, I widen my horizon a little. It also depends on what we could get for Julien. Wheels within wheels here. Good discussion.
  2. ashbury
    You selected that second decimal value with care, did you not. Straight out of college, excelled at high-A, not rookie league* or single-A. Next season, didn't miss a beat at AA. Acquitted himself decently at AAA, with a low enough BABIP to suggest his performance there will trend upward almost immediately next season. The Twins have been criticized for slow promotion of their prospects. Damned if they do, damned if they don't. Lee possibly could have OPSed 1.000 in rookie ball and then repeated the feat at single-A in his second year. But who the heck would want that? That's what you do with a Nate Baez type, who I see has put up nice numbers at single-A after college. Brooks Lee, you want to keep challenged. Brooks Lee shows all the earmarks of a keeper. No prospect is a sure thing - neither is an established veteran - human beings are like that. We "do know" about Lee, almost exactly as well as any player. Of course being a keeper makes him great trade bait if the target acquisition is significant enough. I'm on the fence, thinking we should keep him, but open to a trade for a great pitcher with years of control. * Okay, 4 games there
  3. ashbury
    Cheaper in the long run to just hire some mid-level FO person from Milwaukee or St Louis with 10 years' experience, and then listen carefully each time he or she says, "well, that's not how we did it back in...".
  4. ashbury
    Not only that, but they have to be careful how they tweak it. To avoid getting into two-strike counts at all, they could opt to go for less power (let's say), and then end up with an offense like Cleveland or Washington had this year - low strikeouts, but not a lot of runs scored despite that advantage. CLE and WAS had decent batting averages but low walk rates so their OBPs actually were below league average and they neither one hit with much power. The difficult dilemma is that if you cut down the strikeouts the wrong way, you apparently might cut down on walks and power at the same time, and then that's questionable progress. The solution is to have low strikeouts combined with good OBP and SLG like Houston and Atlanta did. Yes, get some good hitters. Why didn't somebody in the Twins FO think of this before? As you said, not sure how easy it'll actually be. That's why the on field staff gets paid the big bucks.
  5. ashbury
    No team does well at the plate when there are two strikes on the batter. OPS across the majors was .734, but once 2 strikes happen the OPS drops to .523 (in large part because, yes, that's when strikeouts can happen). It's not as if a change in approach with two strikes will turn our hitters into Babe Ruth - the Braves led the majors in two-strike OPS at .596. The Twins' two-strike results in 2023 were under a double whammy. First, they were near the league bottom in OPS at .482. So yes, doing more like the Braves, or even just reaching league norms, would help some. I notice for instance a large dropoff in HR rank with two strikes, compared to their lofty HR total overall. And second, they led the majors in plate appearances that reached two strikes. You're not going to really succeed, operating at a disadvantage more often than your opposition. So, they were in the unfavorable situation too often, and did badly when there. Fix either, and there'll be some improvement. Fix both, and they might really unlock something. (They've taken one good step by parting ways with Joey Gallo, who OPSed a mighty .406 with two strikes. He batted .087 in those situation. Cut the Mendoza line in half, and he was still under that.)
  6. ashbury
    An ace would be nice, a mid-rotation arm should be the aim, but my minimum standard is for acquiring someone who can be reasonably forecast to do better than Louis Varland's 2023 in the majors. That allows Louis to start 2024 at St Paul, and find whatever additional tweaks will let him dominate at AAA, which he didn't do in 2023 either. And while he works at his development, we have someone better to hold his place. Not to mention, you can't get through a season with 5 starters anyway.
  7. ashbury
    I'll wish good luck to all the players involved and hope that they meet expectations better in your gameplay than they did in real life. Milt May makes an obvious trade chip given the other catchers you've mentioned being in the system, but I'm not sure if Foy is going to be the straw that stirs any drinks. (That particular phrase won't come for another decade anyway.) Far be it from me as GM to micromanage, but has anyone in my field staff considered installing Pete Rose at 3B instead? They could be visionaries far ahead of their time. Permit me to still have optimism for Mack Jones to really break through one of these years.
  8. ashbury
    40 man spots are more valuable than these guys. Doesn't matter the low salary. Minor league deal with a player opt-out a month into the regular season, or like that.
  9. ashbury
    I suppose it happens once or twice an off-season.
  10. ashbury
    Every free agent is too rich for 29 teams, because Highest Bidder.
  11. ashbury
    What I'd love is to see others pitch in to help write them.
  12. ashbury
    Catchers ERA has been studied to death over the decades, with no one finding that it's a repeatable statistic that reliably indicates the skill for the position. There are too many factors lying beneath the surface, such as quality of opponent, or simply how to factor in when a pitcher with a good track record comes to the mound with no feel for his curveball the first three innings that day. Since catching tandems don't stay together for many seasons in a row, apples-to-apples comparisons are rare just on that basis alone. Using poorer ERA as evidence for superior talent due to mentoring is a new one, however.
  13. ashbury
    I was offering a reason why your scenario probably wouldn't play out. I would trade Francis Peguero to the Orioles for Kyle Bradish. It's what I'd do. If the Orioles aren't willing then never mind - I'll turn attention to Tanner Bibee, maybe by offering Balazovic.
  14. ashbury
    That team with the good prospect - why wouldn't they sign the other, less expensive catcher, and save themselves the prospect? If the answer is that the other, less expensive catcher is worse than Vazquez, well, maybe that is 10 million good reasons to keep him after all.
  15. ashbury
    Yes, but those numbers for 2023 don't support the narrative people seem to want: Jeffers ERA: 3.61 Vazquez ERA: 4.09
  16. ashbury
    This year Sonny completed 6 or more innings 19 times out of 32 starts. He pitched into the 6th 3 other times. No, Rocco didn't "usually" fail to trust him for more than five. But, but, but, the other pitchers. The Twins in 2023 were tied for third most innings per start. They led the majors in the number of Quality Starts, which can't happen unless the starter goes 6; Sonny contributed 17 of those, more than half his starts. This narrative about Rocco pulling his starters died, once he had good pitchers to work with.
  17. ashbury
    If the Twins turn out to be a juggernaut during the dreary 1970s, then I'll start to worry about balance.
  18. ashbury
    The raw stats are what they are and should never be diminished for the actual events that they reflect. But for analysis, the more formulas, the better. And the more they disagree, the better - when they mainly agree then maybe you learn something about the players, but when they disagree then that's when you may learn something you didn't expect about the game. If two versions of a formula always agree, then one can be dispensed with.
  19. ashbury
    Certainly did in real life.
  20. ashbury
    No spoilers, now. Give everybody time to guess.
  21. ashbury
    "Don't like being backup?" I say (to both). "Then beat him out for starter's minutes." Who knows what heights Bench might have attained if he'd ever been pushed a little. Ryan Jeffers and Christian Vazquez, eat your hearts out.
  22. ashbury
    I play the long game. As long as I've got Tommy Helms, Jimmy Stewart, and Lee May to give him, I'm sure Chief can convince me to take overrated Joe off his hands around 1971 or so.
  23. ashbury
    (Not to threadjack or anything, but....) Wait, I've got Thurman Munson at catcher too? And Jim Wynn in his prime? And I've still got Frank Robinson? Hm, wonder if I can somehow interest Baltimore in swapping us Milt Pappas for a bag of baseballs. Oh, and I've got Jerry Reuss? (Rubs hands with glee...)
  24. ashbury
    (Ash had put in a good word.)
  25. ashbury
    Late 60s? Big Red Machine, baby! (I'm going to make sure to trademark that in advance!) See you in the World Series some year. Or two. Or three.
×
×
  • Create New...