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
    The fallacy there is that you're basing your judgment on payroll levels during rebuilding. Context matters. We saw in 2011 that they have the ability to push payroll higher than that when they think the team can contend (oh, how wrong that was...). That's what matters to me.
  2. jay
    Reasonable based on what? Bar napkin interpretation of their quotes and internet estimates? It definitely sounds mandated.
  3. jay
    Your math is off there... divide by 6, not 5. Average payroll in TF assuming next year is flat = 17th. I don't think the "Target Field promise" included higher payroll relative to other teams, but they have. In absolute terms, even accounting for inflation, there's no question the payroll has increased.
  4. jay
    If we wanted to hold the Twins accountable to certain spending levels in order to approve a new stadium, we should have demanded that public accountability to their revenue and payroll with independent auditors. Internet analysis to accomplish that is bunk. The "but we built you Target Field" payroll story is so worn out and, frankly, false. We want a new ballfield to mean that payroll should increase. IT HAS. The Twins' MLB payroll increased faster than any measure of general inflation or MLB salary inflation. Look at 2003-2009, then look at 2010-2014. Get back to me if that's not "increasing the payroll". http://www.baseballprospectus.com/compensation/cots/american-league/minnesota-twins/
  5. jay
    The only thing that matters to me is whether or not the Twins are willing to spend what it takes to fill a key void when the rest of the pieces are in place to contend. Just like the Cardinals did with Peralta. The Twins should be more like the Cardinals. I couldn't care less what the actual payroll number is. Setting some arbitrary dollar figure that has to be spent based on fan angst is a good way to end up with a bunch of crappy contracts and blocked prospects.
  6. jay
    ... that you know you like and can keep.
  7. jay
    I prefer "sophisticated palate", but that works too.
  8. jay
    Definitely knew what you were saying. Mostly celebrating that I don't ever have to look through 90 Bud Light check-ins!
  9. jay
    Could we replace "Cubs" with "Twins" and call your statement equal?
  10. jay
    But think of how many runs we'd score! We can't even measure defense anyway.
  11. jay
    Thank goodness for self-selecting data! Admittedly, those retro cans make Miller Lite taste better.
  12. jay
    Found a great article about how the Cubs' GM, Theo Epstein, is going to approach this offseason: http://espn.go.com/blog/chicago/cubs/post/_/id/27875/epstein-were-good-enough-to-compete The Cubs will be pursuing outside talent and free agents, but won't be desparate about it. Does this sound like an approach the Twins should be using? How close is it to the approach the Twins are taking? I'd answer "yes" and "close", respectively. The Twins and Cubs are at similar spots in their rebuild. Both have been able to establish some young players. Both have highly regarded farms expected to produce impact talent. Both have a shortage of good starting pitching. The Cubs will presumably have more financial resources in the end, but timing that leap for an impact player is crucial in both cases.
  13. jay
    ... and even then the answers to those questions are going to be quite contentious. Should be fun for TD...
  14. jay
    I know you didn't say all the time. The point was that guys with his type of bat that can stick somewhere other than the corner OF/1B can be even more valuable if that lets you get another big bat in one of those spots. The questions you're asking are the right ones. It's pretty clear the Twins don't see him up to start the year. I agree that the Twins need to keep an open mind on how to get him up to MLB, but I dont think we can start answering those questions until a few months are in the books.
  15. jay
    Mike - I get your point... but if you apply that approach all the time, you're going to have a roster full of corner OFs and 1Bs. Those positions almost always have a good bat. You'll never have an impact bat anywhere else. Those other positions require an investment in development time. That can require being patient with the player, even if you think his bat might play sooner.
  16. jay
    Could Sano end up being decent or even good defensively at 3B? Sure. The part I don't think you've addressed is how he plays 3B if your scenario about Plouffe maintaining or improving holds true. If that's the case, don't you get Sano in the lineup as a corner OFer? Why not do that now? This is the aspect of 'positional value' that fails, IMO. If Sano ends up in the OF because the Twins have a decent/good 3B but a gap in the OF, Sano is worth less? Team context is lost in making those kinds of valuations. This is coming from a guy who places a lot of value in advanced metrics...
  17. jay
    I agree those guys need to contribute to move past the rebuild. I don't understand how or why that means trashing the guy who had the second best season on the team. The Twins need MORE players who can contribute a season like Plouffe just did, not less. If Plouffe was average, we had plenty of below average performers elsewhere. If Plouffe doesn't maintain his production, then you look at Sano to overtake him. That hasn't happened yet and is nowhere near a guarantee. Let's also not forget that the offense wasn't the problem this year. By every account I've seen, it was the pitching and outfield defense. Plouffe was neither of those problems and dumping him fixes neither. We also have a glaring gap in one of the OF corners. Why wouldn't you put a prospect who has questionable defense at 3B but plenty of bat and is supposedly a great athlete in position to fill that hole?
  18. jay
    Sounds like Plouffe is in line to win some awards as the most underappreciated Twin. What'd that guy do wrong? Not live up to hitting 18 homers every month and half like in 2012?
  19. jay
    Yes. This strategy has also been employed extensively by the A's. Positional flexibility has positive value!
  20. jay
    TR in that same Q&A session on Sano making the club out of ST: “He’s not going to be ready to make this team out of spring training. He’s going to have to re-establish himself,” Ryan said of the 21-year-old Dominican. “We’ll give him a good look in spring training, but to put that out there, that he’s got a chance to make this club out of spring, I think that would be the wrong approach. He’s barely got any at-bats at Double-A.” TR echoing my belief that no one moves an established vet for an unproven rook: “So if we had a problem at third and you had too much talent over there, which is a good problem to have, you certainly could consider the young kid going to the outfield and learning his craft out there. A lot of them do — there are a lot of young players who come up and change positions in a hurry if they’re blocked [by] an established veteran.”
  21. jay
    Here's TR saying that Sano could head to the outfield if he's not ready for 3B or if there's an established veteran at the spot: http://m.startribune.com/sports/twins/278610501.html?section=/sports
  22. jay
    Yeah, 20-25 is probably too low a range to consistently be in. I'll revise to 15-20 consistently. Ability to flex to 10-15 when in the prime phase of a "window" and 20-25 when rebuilding.
  23. jay
    Was Vargas proven? Was Arcia proven? Was Danny Santana proven? Was Hicks proven? Was any prospect that has ever been called up proven?
  24. jay
    What's your plan for Plouffe?
  25. jay
    The ability to do it isn't the same as always doing it. I'd think they'll more commonly be in the 15-25 range. Shouldn't payroll flex in step with your likelihood of success? It matters. Where are the top 10?
×
×
  • Create New...