Jump to content
The MLB Draft starts on Saturday at 1pm Eastern. Check out our mock draft board in the lead-up to the picks! ×
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

ashbury

Verified Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    41,438

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    465

 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 Pick Tracker

Forums

Blogs

Events

Store

Downloads

Gallery

Everything posted by ashbury

  1. ashbury
    Is there a term for Polanco's defensive performance today? Badarmitis?
  2. ashbury
    Watching this afternoon's game, and comparisons to Tyler Duffey seem like a kiss of death for a prospect.
  3. ashbury
    Sano is not a "good" defensive third baseman overall, and never was. But even back when we (and the team) were trying to sort out his best role, his first year or three, that was the play he would consistently make as well as anyone there is. He would charge accidental slow rollers or intentional bunts with complete authority and confidence, and his arm was never suspect. If Altuve thought it was a good gamble to test him on that play, after a long absence from the position, well he lost.
  4. ashbury
    Where was this extra-innings moxie earlier in the season when it might have made a difference?
  5. ashbury
    You're describing a bottom-feeder team. I don't actually care very much how my team fills in some holes when they are in that role. Simmons would be fine, not-Simmons would be fine.
  6. ashbury
    He's so easy to root for. Glad his bat has bounced back!
  7. ashbury
  8. ashbury
    His actual words were "it's hard to quote but easy to paraphrase."
  9. ashbury
    I appreciate your response, because as I was typing that analysis I knew I was being That Guy again.
  10. ashbury
    Sure, that can be the opening negotiation tactic. But does a negotiator buy his own rhetoric? At the end of the day trade deadline, a wise negotiator looks at the actual offers in hand, and decides if the best one is good enough. Doesn't matter how high they aimed.
  11. ashbury
    A clickbait article with a question mark in the headline - I reviewed it and one, maybe two, responses indicated support for that. I could post an article titled "Did the Sun rise in the West this morning?" and probably get a couple of positive responses. I'll stand by what I said before.
  12. ashbury
    Not that this affects your point (2021 Twins are bad), but I count 17 other seasons where the franchise had a winning percentage below .415 since 1922, including the 100-loss team of 2016. They have turned in some real clunkers. The First-in-War First-in-Peace Last-in-the-AL Senators were known for putrid showings before 1922, also.
  13. ashbury
    Celestino with a 1.400 OPS at AAA. Maybe time to call him up and see what he can do against big league pitching?
  14. ashbury
    You're about the last person I'd expect to view the trade deadline as a poker tournament. Sure, there's a little fog-of-war. But don't you think the FO fielded whatever offers there were, tried to get the other teams to sweeten them a little, and concluded that no one was offering much for an average-ish starter, and decided to stand pat on that one? Oops, poker terminology after all.
  15. ashbury
    I don't think there is hate for Donaldson. There is some nervousness about the risk of significant injury in the later years of his contract, and if there is no hope of contention in 2022 then we're carrying that risk for 1.3 seasons with little in the way of possible reward to balance it. Those who foresee contention in 2022 will judge that risk differently of course. And that was probably the dilemma the FO faced as they considered whatever offers they got for him. The broader fan base wants to contend every year, and the projected return from trading him would have been a PR hit they decided not to take. IMO of course.
  16. ashbury
    We ruined him already??? Nah, I missed that about him when the trade was announced. He pitched a week ago and finished a game to earn a quick win - wha' hoppened?
  17. ashbury
    Then again maybe Wes works his magic on Gant.
  18. ashbury
    The bigtime stuff and the control questions which recently surfaced could be related. That video of his nasty curveball looked to me like with a different umpire and/or on a different day could have been called outside of the strike zone. As he's moved up to AA now, he's facing more-experienced batters, who are more likely to be able to lay off, leaving SWR at the mercy of the day's ump - same story for every prospect worth talking about. It could be that his stuff is MLB-ready but what he needs to polish up is that ineffable ability to persuade the ump to give him the borderline calls, inning after inning - a single pitch every inning or two can be the difference between a successful outing and an unsuccessful one.
  19. ashbury
    They're 5-17, but it's just bad luck - scoring 100 runs and giving up 137 should by rights have them more like 8-14.
  20. ashbury
    Yeah, me and my 8th grade classmates being forced to study Art Appreciation had a good laugh when we contemplated paintings of Venetian doges. Funny word, funny clothes. We probably learned something from the experience but I have no idea what, except a bougie ability to name a painter or three. It certainly did not prepare us for important 21st century concepts like memes and cryptocurrency.
  21. ashbury
    You can't bring up as many players on the 40-man in September as used to be possible, so the urgency to add anyone to the 40-man for that purpose, before the off-season/Rule-5, has decreased.
  22. ashbury
    A waiver claim, and a 30-year old minor league off-season signing? Talk about wishful thinking, on two out of three!
  23. ashbury
    I think you're on the right track about that. General managers seem to assign steeper and steeper value to players who are well above average. The value of adding just 2 months (on an expiring contract) of someone average-ish just isn't that high anymore. But the value of adding someone like Scherzer is greatly esteemed. When I think about the constraints front offices have to manage (40-man and 26-man rosters being critical resources), I tend to think these valuations are correct. As for the trades: I like the Cruz trade even if the two MLB-ready prospects turn out like (say) Vance Worley and Trevor May, so give it an A+. I am not as enthusiastic about the Berrios deal, for reasons I won't wax eloquent about here, but it's a high-upside gamble that deserves at least a B+ for its concept. Getting a little something in terms of prospect potential for Hansel Robles is not very meaningful but positive, so call it a C+ for good execution. I think I read that the deal for Happ included the Twins paying a good portion of the remaining contract, and the pitchers in return don't look so good after sleeping on it overnight, so that one is just a Gentleman's C as an addition-by-subtraction move as others have termed it. I think they would have liked to move Donaldson's contract for just a bag of balls, in a vacuum, but didn't want to take the PR hit, I feel I understand his staying. Since I agree with your analysis on why Pineda (and by analogy the others on expiring contracts) wasn't moved, I don't have any major criticisms of the overall moves, so all in all I give the FO an A.
  24. ashbury
    That phrase keeps coming up. Who is to say what is "wishful" thinking? In a year or two, recurrence of injuries could mean that keeping Buxton and Donaldson will look wishful in hindsight. I don't think it's a useful way to characterize differences of opinion.
  25. ashbury
    Outbidding the Yankees and Dodgers on a free agent is your plan of action? Or, getting less for him at the next trading deadline than we got now?
×
×
  • Create New...