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
    Indians, eh? We should go examine their front office and raid them of a few up-and-coming bright lights.
  2. ashbury
    Is there a glossary for this chart? I can't remember all of the abbreviations.
  3. ashbury
    Perhaps you didn't live during the Cold War. But, you've never made microwave popcorn?
  4. ashbury
    To whom? If you mean us arm-chair GMs trying to pretend to keep up with the pros, perhaps. Not to the ones who designed the stat, though.
  5. ashbury
    He's now been traded twice for legitimate major league pitching, so evidently the scouts see something.
  6. ashbury
    Moya came to us from Arizona in exchange for catcher JR Murphy.
  7. ashbury
    Article comment threads don't usually go on this long, especially not ones based on a timely rumor. Start a new thread with a title that correctly names which week Darvish will sign, and see who joins you in conversation.
  8. ashbury
    Sylvestarrrrrrr.
  9. ashbury
    Why not both? "Thufferin' thuckotath, matey, ye'll be walkin' the plank if ye don't sign for just three years - yer dethpicable."
  10. ashbury
    That's gotta be Small Sample Size. Otherwise, you're arguing that, say, Buxton gets an initial read on a long fly ball, says "I might be able to reach that", then thinks twice and says, "nah, that one's on Gibby".
  11. ashbury
    Too bad the two guys he passes up in the pecking order don't get the same benefit.
  12. ashbury
    I'd try him at high-A. He'll go only as far as his bat will take him, because his glove seems to be legit, and his season numbers in CR weren't good, but I'm willing to give him a mulligan for the horrific first two months and accept his .721 OPS from June onward as a cherry-picked indication of learning. He'll only be in his age-20 season this year, so "merely" keeping at that OPS level through constant learning the rest of the way up the system would mean he'll get to the majors as a useful player and probably a starter eventually. No doubt his bat is a risk - I sense that his manager may have done additional cherry-picking of games for him to start - but to me it's questionable that another year begun at Cedar Rapids will actually do anything for him, confidence-wise or other-wise.
  13. ashbury
    This source says the Astros players' share of post-season money is $30.4M (divided up as they see fit, of course). It goes on to state that they derive from 60% of this and 60% of that, so I infer that the team gets something like a 40% share of the total, or about 2/3 of the players' share - i.e. about $20M. The article is full of good nuggets. I'm embarrassed to say that my other source, once again, is the Out Of The Park baseball game, and it seems to concur, giving the WS winner about $20M. Losing the one-game Wild Card seems to net a team about $1M, so it lines up at the low end too. OOTP is a bit eccentric about how closely it follows any given MLB rule; using it as a research source is perhaps a bit like using an Ernest Hemingway novel for a question about proper fishing technique - the basics might be close but there could be artistic license.
  14. ashbury
    Dow futures are apparently down another 1000 at the moment. The cat could still bounce, but right now it's just lying there. This still isn't into 10% "correction" territory yet, I should add. The numbers are just so huge anymore.
  15. ashbury
    It wasn't that long ago when I detailed my attempt to market-time the dotcom bubble ca 2000. So I'm not going there again - I'm just offering a cautious counterpoint - all that glisters is not gold, and not all that bounces is still alive. There is, however, a lot of money to be made in volatility. I'm just not expert enough to do it.
  16. ashbury
    Those with cash might make some money on a dead-cat bounce, at least as long as they are nimble and can get back out fast
  17. ashbury
    Now we learn the Lord doesn't answer every prayer:
  18. ashbury
    When the O-line is successful, guys eventually get open. Were there any holding calls at all? That's fine, as long as it's being called the same for both teams, but it makes for a very different game.
  19. ashbury
    But the big teams already subsidize the small teams in various ways. The draft, the years of team control over a player at minimal salary, the new luxury tax - these are a way of roping off some of the talent, and letting the bidding happen only for a subset of worthwhile players, and making it punitive to really go overboard. Artificially making a small team's dollars go farther is a form of sharing. The big teams understand the dilemma - they develop the big markets and should reap a lot of the reward for doing that, but it would be for naught if there are not enough opponents to play against to make it interesting. Of course there has to be incentive for the small teams to develop their own markets to their fullest too. It is all a matter of scale, but sharing has already been decided long ago. We're now just debating a further tweak to the process. A syndicate of unequal partners probably can never remain static.
  20. ashbury
    It may have seemed like I was diminishing the constructive change he made, but I wasn't. I don't deny that he is doing something materially different. But baseball's a game of adjustment, and adjustment to adjustment. There needs to be some time for the "book" to get updated for a player, before you know whether an improvement in results will be lasting. That's where it's really unsafe for someone at home like me to scout by the numbers. And I'll note that when he got scored on heavily in his last three starts, he was still putting up gaudy K/9 numbers. Anyway, we've all been tantalized by Gibby before, so I fall back on the old saying, fool me 47 times, shame on Kyle, fool me 48 times, shame on me.
  21. ashbury
    Pitchers make changes all the time. I am not sold on Gibson having turned any corner; he's turned corners before, only to disappoint us, and somehow the corner got un-turned in his final three starts in 2017. I'm rooting for Kyle, just not counting on him.
  22. ashbury
    Do Cobb, Lynn and Arrieta get to play this first-half/second-half game? Because, just eyeballing br-com's splits for them quickly, all three of these gentlemen had better second halves too.
  23. ashbury
    If you don't believe MLB will understand the message if it contains a typo, I fail to see how a second typo will improve matters.
  24. ashbury
    Check back again next week and we'll give you the same answer. We strive for consistency.
  25. ashbury
    OK, up to here. But that doesn't follow. Historically, you could construct exactly the same thread of logic to explain not taking action against dangerous performance drugs, against gambling on games, against free-agent collusion, against... anything that threatens the long-term health of the game. You could make similar arguments against starting to play night games or to breaking the color line. "If it ain't broke, don't fix it" is a rule of thumb, not some kind of absolute wisdom that trumps everything. Successful businesses constantly look for problems on the horizon and then take steps to combat them before they become a crisis. Arguments like your a,b,c do not hold water in and of themselves.
×
×
  • Create New...