Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

jay

Provisional Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    1,544

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 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 jay

  1. jay
    I'm not in favor of this move. However, I can't possibly understand taking this one tweeted rumor of some potential interest, turning that into a determination that the Twins view him as their next starting outfielder and then using that to proclaim that the Twins aren't relying on data.
  2. jay
    I'm curious to see what he can do and glad to see the Twins dipping their toes back into the int'l FA market. Also, it would be awesome if we could avoid going all "Chris Rahl" on this and ridicule the Twins for making a minor move early in the offseason.
  3. jay
    All what bother?? Submitting a bid and negotiating a contract? A 40 man roster spot? The scouting reports are all over the board, but he's still a young lefty who throws in the mid-90s. This seems like a pretty minimal bother...
  4. jay
    I've seen the script of dramatic reactions stating what the Twins are doing based on very minimal information turn out completely wrong often enough. I'm going to wait until we hear a lot more on this one before going there, yet again.
  5. jay
    If the idea is that he can compete with Parmelee and Colabello for the last spot as a bench bat, maybe. Or, more likely replace Colabello in that competition. Anything more than that, hellz no.
  6. jay
    I was about to post that article with literally the exact same thought. This one is strange.
  7. jay
    I said they have a higher range of variation due to their injury factors. That can result in low or zero output if injured (sub-replacement level on one extreme) or the "upside" of high output if healthy (which exceeds contract value). I don't see how that has anything to do with the Dome, Minnesota or an inefficient market. Price discounting as expected variation increases (aka risk) is the trait of an efficient market. You can find reading about how risk and variation effect price in most any finance or economics book.
  8. jay
    Pretty darn close to my blueprint, so obviously I like it. A few thoughts... - Pelfrey in the pen instead of a FA RP - Non-tender Swarzak (not mentioned here), Duensing (especially with Meyer available in the pen at least early) and Nunez (your extra position player) - Extend Dozier (increased 2015 cost) I'm not ready to commit a 2015 rotation spot to May yet. Time in AAA wouldn't be the worst thing due to better depth and provides a chance to work on some things he might have learned in his MLB stint this year. Masterson, Anderson and Nolasco would all have injury questions to answer, but Milone and May are good fallback options along with Meyer or even Pelfrey who can be stretched out of the pen. That ends up in the $95M range with Anderson as the unknown with incentives. If the team is struggling at mid-season, Schafer, Anderson, Rios, Masterson, Milone, and Pelfrey all represent options to trade/waive to shed salary.
  9. jay
    The contract value they sign for represents their expected value to that team. Players like Masterson, Rasmus and Rios all carry significant risk -- no one is denying that. However, it's that variation in expected value that makes their contract value lower. There's also larger potential for them to exceed their contract value if healthy. I only see two alternatives: - Contracts of similar value are going to be for players who might not have health issues, but have a lower perceived ceiling. Hammel and Aoki might be good examples. - Contracts of higher value and longer length. Almost every team is going to be limited in how many of these they can do. These guys come with a whole separate set of risks as we've seen illustrated by Nolasco and a majority of other larger dollar FA contracts. I don't see how either of those are better for the Twins right now than taking some risk on higher-ceiling players.
  10. jay
    Where's the arbitrary line for the free agent discard heap? Top 50? Top 20? Top 10? Masterson, Rasmus and Rios are all anywhere from 15-50 in the top free agent rankings at ESPN, Fangraphs and MLB Trade Rumors...
  11. jay
    Isn't that the downside of ANY player the Twins are spending significant money on? What's the alternative here?
  12. jay
    Yes, but it's not quite the same when you're shopping in a nicer heap. The Kubel, Zumaya, Ponson pile smells a lot worse than the Masterson, Rasmus, Rios pile.
  13. jay
    I'm not sure who those people are, but there's generally additional risk whenever people are talking about upside. Kubel was on the far end of the scale in hoping for upside, as was represented in the minimal cost. I don't quite understand having a negative view of those deals based off that. Does that mean no interest in Rasmus or Masterson either? The Twins are in a great position to take a risk on players that can exceed their contract value.
  14. jay
    Pretty different players and body types. And no, Kubel did not have as much "upside". Power, sure -- every other aspect of the game, no. If we want to highlight upside candidates that didn't work out, is that saying the Twins shouldn't make those deals? Seems to me it's exactly what they should be looking for. How many other options are out there that would be a better fit for a short-term deal? Maybe a couple?
  15. jay
    Let's not make it sound like I'm in love with Rios... because I'm not. I only mentioned Masterson to highlight that Rios has some ceiling as well. Rios can likely be had on a one year deal while every projection I've seen for Masterson and Rasmus says multi-year (and higher AAV), so comparing contract status is hardly apples to apples. Of the OF free agent options, Rios has some amount of upside and bounce back potential... which is more than can be said for many of the other options.
  16. jay
    I'm a bit surprised there isn't more support for Rios. He's another high ceiling guy just like Masterson with WAR > 3 in six of the last nine seasons (something Masterson has only done twice in his career). He had a bum ankle and then a thumb injury holding him back in 2014. Isn't there an opportunity to find good value with a bounceback in 2015? Especially at a projected 1/$7M?
  17. jay
    Jenkins is nothing like Stewart. Drafted 50th overall 4 years ago and hitting the back edge of the BA list is nowhere near Stewart's upside nor documented prospect status. Jenkins is more like Burdi or Cederoth who the Twins drafted this year, except with injury trouble since then downgrading his stock even further. Miller is probably most like Berrios in our system, but obviously further along with 2 years of ML experience (and soon to be increasing salaries).
  18. jay
    He'd definitely get more than Billy Butler. Adam LaRoche generates more pop, but even a down year for Mauer in OBP is at LaRoche's career best. LaRoche is projected for a deal around 3/$36M. Despite a down 2014 and injury concerns, Mauer's upside would trump every bat on the market. I think Mauer could easily get a fourth year due to his age, so I'll say 4/$56M.
  19. jay
    This is really what I was getting at. If he's prone to allowing significantly more home runs up in the zone (which I think we all painfully recall), it would seem that any advantage gained in getting a higher percentage of outs is going to quickly evaporate.
  20. jay
    Parker, I'd like to highlight this part of the last paragraph: Often with Baker and Slowey, it wasn't. That's probably partly due to the fact they weren't conditioned to do so. Baker's average against might look better high in the zone, but I don't think that tells an accurate or complete story. The chart below shows Baker's RAA/100 (runs above average per 100 pitches) and it seems clear that damage was done against him high in the zone. This same chart looks quite different for a guy like Trevor Bauer. It seems like a stretch to use Baker as an example of someone who should have pitched up more often. I agree in full that the new pitching coach needs to be able to synthesize the data to make each pitcher effective in whatever manner that might be -- strikeouts, contact, pitching down, pitching up, fly balls, groundballs, etc.
  21. jay
    So... like... Ricky Nolasco? Pretty sure that's exactly what they did there.
  22. jay
    Agreed -- and the Twins are definitely not all-in. Why not? I rather like the idea of a Nolasco - Crawford swap for both teams.
  23. jay
    The budget dilemma I see is actually a little different -- and goes beyond this offseason. Next year, the only real money coming off the books is Pelfrey -- freeing up $5M. That difference is easily gone when you account for arbitration raises to Fien, Escobar and Plouffe plus Perkins increasing contract. Additionally, you now have Dozier eligible for arbitration and looking at a big raise (if not already extended). The year after that, Hughes and Suzuki becomes free agents -- freeing up $14M. Even assuming neither of them are retained, a significant portion of that money is going to be eaten up by arb or contractual raises again to Dozier, Plouffe, Fien, Escobar and the newly arb eligible Gibson. The takeaway here is that if the Twins shoot their financial load to acquire someone this offseason with significant future obligations via either free agency or trade, there isn't money coming off the books the next few years to go after additional guys. It looks to me like the Twins have the financial ability (within realistic expectations of what will actually happen) to fire one big bullet of $15-20M or smaller ones totalling that. That bullet needs to fired after careful aim and it is fully possible that aim won't be zeroed in this offseason.
  24. jay
    Why in the world would they trade away assets for a pitcher with one year of control and then go shopping next offseason? That makes no sense and completely wastes those assets. Keep the assets and go shopping next year if it's not this year.
  25. jay
    Love the Berrios report. Big things on the way from that guy. He has the drive and determination to be great.
×
×
  • Create New...