Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

ashbury

Verified Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    42,579

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    473

 Content Type 

Profiles

Minnesota Twins News, Rumors & Analysis

Minnesota Twins Videos

2026 Minnesota Twins Top Prospect Rankings

2022 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

Minnesota Twins Trade & Free Agent Rumors

Minnesota Twins Fan Guides & Resources

2023 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

The Minnesota Twins Players Project

2024 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

2025 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

2026 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

Forums

Blogs

Events

Store

Downloads

Gallery

Everything posted by ashbury

  1. ashbury
    Meh. Bill James keeps trying to peddle his Win Shares in new clothing. Didn't care much for it when it came out (shrouded in proprietary secrecy at that), still don't. Ironically, long ago he was part of the vanguard pointing out that winning close games wasn't a particularly repeatable skill for teams, from one year to the next - best to just score lots of runs over the course of a season and try to not give up a lot, and let the W-L chips fall where they may. Now he's in the camp of "well, those extra wins didn't just come out of thin air, now did they?" I'm not in favor of rewriting history, and for subjective awards like MVP I'm fine with giving weight to the sheer will and determination and moxie that obviously accounted for Houston's 101 wins, versus the Yankees' lack of same accounting for their 91 wins. I just think James carries it too far, and he remains too defensive about his pet stat. He can't seem to do it without tearing down others' work, and his claim that he's held his tongue all these years doesn't pass muster for me - he's been saying this on his paywall-protected website for years, to the approving murmurs of his acolytes there.
  2. ashbury
    FTFY.
  3. ashbury
    Unlike most of us, Brian keeps a notepad beside his bed and remembers to jot down his fever dreams when he wakes up from them at 3 a.m. With no game threads to start, he has to find other uses for these gems. Man, I wish I had sweet dreams like that one.
  4. ashbury
    When I left the Twin Cities in 1996, I thought Reusse had become something of a punch line. Did his reputation go through a renaissance, or am I just misremembering?
  5. ashbury
    I guess I'm late to the realization that NFL refs don't even try. Just call that not-even-nearly-a-fumble a TD, and let the video review crew make the actual decision. Sheesh.
  6. ashbury
    The response was to your statement there was zero evidence. Now that non-zero evidence is in hand, do you want to tell us where the goalposts are before we go off looking for more? It is the beginning of the off-season, after all, and nearly everyone seems to acknowledge that a first off-season coming off a 100+ loss season may not give guidance for what comes now. All "evidence" is by nature going to be fragmentary. If what you want now is for it to be "solid", that's a lot to ask. We're just reading tea leaves for now.
  7. ashbury
    A Kohl Stewart thread isn't really the place to debate a bigger-picture thing like this, but I think you've said it before, and I don't understand why. Other teams can see the 40-man dilemma approaching for such players, just as we can.
  8. ashbury
    My wife's Aunt Loretta Recipe Dinner Rolls. You haven't lived.
  9. ashbury
    I'm repeating myself if I say that that was my plan at Y2K too. I got out and in at the two red markings. Looks kind of good, but I left a lot on the table percentagewise at the cash-out, and because I allocated more aggressively when going back in, the final gut-wrench was more painful than it looks. Better luck to you.
  10. ashbury
    Trying to ward off any jinxes.
  11. ashbury
    I don't disagree in absolute terms, but we can't dispose of all our lefties, and so long as Buddy Boshers holds a roster spot I see Rogers as safe.
  12. ashbury
    I did that, back in the tech bubble of 2000. Got out when the valuations became too rich for me, gnashed my teeth as prices went up another 25%, felt vindicated when prices eventually declined and even went below the level when I had sold, got in more heavily than ever at a certain point, and proceeded to absorb yet another 25%-or-so downturn. Market timing can be right and still be wrong - if the market becomes brutal. My advice to my former self would be to wait, in an overheated market, for the top to be manifested by an actual downturn. There's a lot of money to be made during irrational exuberance. Calling a market bottom, in the same vein, probably is best left to the experts, and missing out on the very early weeks of the next bull market isn't the end of the world. Dollar cost averaging, rather than all-out then all-in, might be a decent strategy during the uncertainty. Regarding the rest of your message, I've told you before I like your general plan.
  13. ashbury
    Heh, I thought about including Parms as an example that anyone is "capable" of playing CF, but I was already piling on. I think we are approximately aligned as regards Wade's future. If the team carried five outfielders, and if his power comes in for real, then he and Granite might be complementary enough to serve as #4 and #5, with the ordering being more a matter of terminology than anything. Both can potentially do a lot, and one can make up for the holes in the other's game.
  14. ashbury
    I don't rule out the Twins picking someone with the intention to flip him to one of the bottom feeders for some kind of consideration (Int'l signing pool money, etc). Mostly I just wanted to use the term bottom feeders to describe some other team for a change.
  15. ashbury
    Wade is IMO "capable of playing center field" only in the sense that lots of talented all-around athletes can. Heck, he'd probably do very well at shortstop for your slow-pitch softball team, too. But, on a team that wants to win it all, I don't see him as a major-league center fielder, except on an emergency basis, and Byron Buxton is not relevant to his destiny. Watching him go after foul fly balls while patrolling RF convinced me, at least as far a watching a couple of games is able to give any insight, that his speed is just not sufficient for center. Some things can be taught, but what he lacks probably can't. His power needs to become legit too, or else he's not even a starting major league corner outfielder. I like him (he hits for average, and his AFL concussion demonstrates he wants the ball on defense), but my optimism is guarded.
  16. ashbury
    A bunch of football players dressed in purple. I think I'll be saved.
  17. ashbury
    For most of the names being discussed, no. Separate rules determine free-agency for the guys originally signed by a franchise. http://www.milb.com/milb/info/faq.jsp?mc=business#24 "All Minor League Uniform Player Contracts between either a Major or a Minor League Club and a player who has not previously signed a contract with a Major or a Minor League Club shall be for a term of seven Minor League playing seasons." It takes a long time to work off your indentured servant status.
  18. ashbury
    A nitpick that doesn't have bearing on how to use him in 2018, but he must have had one of his options used when they brought him up to the majors in mid-August and then sent him back to Rochester, no?
  19. ashbury
    This is the food thread, right? With the approach of Thanksgiving: Enjoy!
  20. ashbury
    He still has room for growth in the "don't get called for silly clipping" department.
  21. ashbury
    As with any well-functioning organization. I doubt either of us could muster evidence really demonstrating either way. This organization has always been good at keeping rumors to a minimum. I don't imagine any ownership quibbles about payroll allocation over a short term. But when it comes to a contract that might be an albatross for the next GM, if things were to turn sour with the present braintrust, an owner would be remiss if not downright derelict if they operated according to that third sentence I was responding to. A heavily-backloaded contract for instance might get a thumbs down. Especially since the Pohlad family is not renowned for a loosey-goosey attitude about money, as opposed to some ownerships that seem more motivated by sportsman/hobby motivations, I formed my conclusion. YMMV.
  22. ashbury
    I count myself on the optimistic side of this offseason and go along with the first two sentences, but boy, I'm not sure I see this ownership as quite so hands-off where it comes to the contracts we're contemplating here. It's probably a given that any franchise has ownership sign off when the contract is above a certain total value; franchises will vary on what that threshold is, and how close to a rubber stamp the process is. Chances are that our ownership has a relatively low threshold, and that they look through the due-diligence in very careful detail.
  23. ashbury
    Like normal, in other words. I misunderstood you the first time.
  24. ashbury
    The Tao that can be spoken is not the eternal Tao. The DH who steps onto the field when the other team bats is not a DH. Rule 5.11(a)(12): "Once a Designated Hitter assumes a position on defense, such move shall terminate the Designated Hitter role for that club for the remainder of the game."
  25. ashbury
    And this demonstrates why I didn't even bother constructing sample hands. Next analogy I'm working on: Hannibal crossing the Alps. It'll be a good one, if I can just work out a couple of pesky final details about what elephants eat. Stay tuned.
×
×
  • Create New...