Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

TheLeviathan

Old-Timey Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    20,800

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    47

 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 TheLeviathan

  1. TheLeviathan
    That depends on how we go forward, same as it did before we made the trade.
  2. TheLeviathan
    I want to point out the irony here as well: The Twins acquired Jose Berrios via a comp pick for letting a major league player walk from their team. They made a business decision about a player who was still productive and a fan favorite that ultimately was best for the club long term. And now here we are with Berrios. It's not his fault, but when things don't come together it doesn't help to double down on a failed attempt.
  3. TheLeviathan
    Yet....the suck has happened. And will continue to happen. If you're somehow squeezing joy out of this god awful season I have confidence you'll continue to find it if you're so determined. Doing nothing was going to continue to result in one good pitcher and a bad baseball team. You seem to grasp this notion, what I cant' grasp is why you would like it to endure.
  4. TheLeviathan
    I seriously don't understand this one...but I'll take it!
  5. TheLeviathan
    This is really well said. Yeah, it sucks to lose Jose. He's probably my favorite Twin, but the Twins pitching wasn't winning anything with him and he wasn't staying. You can lament the state of things without letting it color your ability to see the path forward. The path forward for this team was to move on, acquire assets, and rework the roster. We might be able to flip Marten for a pitcher. Maybe Woods-Richardson will step right in. Same with some of the other arms we added. We weren't going to progress being stagnant. Take big swings. Some of you would've been on a Padres board 5 years ago singing the ballads of James Shields and the worthlessness of prospects like Tatis. (Best case scenario of course, but you can't hit roster homeruns without taking swings) It's ok to feel crappy about the state of things, but some sense of reality would be nice.
  6. TheLeviathan
    Winning will put butts in the seat. Staying with a bad team and changing nothing will not change that.
  7. TheLeviathan
    That's different than the last four months....how? I guess we can just stay with a bad team and just hope that we magically become not bad? I don't understand this mentality. The disappointment is already a reality, no reason to double down out of obstinance.
  8. TheLeviathan
    Martin is exactly the guy I was eye-balling if the Jays were the team that landed him. I preferred San Diego's SS, but I'll take this return!
  9. TheLeviathan
    I'd be curious how you feel about Lovecraft after you finish it. We haven't started it, but I've been wary to because I've heard it fell off the cliff midway through the season.
  10. TheLeviathan
    Vital? No, but he's not being paid like he's vital. He's being vastly underpaid for how useful, versatile, and good he is. Plus, we've seen the upside there too. I think all you'll get for Kepler is people trying to steal an undervalued asset, you won't get someone to pony up.
  11. TheLeviathan
    Maybe they are ok with that. They shouldn't be.
  12. TheLeviathan
    I think Kiriloff is a 1B, not an OF. The team still has a spot for Kepler and, let's face it, if Buxton is our CFer we better damn sure have a guy that can slide over too.
  13. TheLeviathan
    I appreciate the sobering reality you provided on Buxton. I think it's too pessimistic, but a lot of folks here at TD also are way too far off the deep end the other way. If you read a lot of these comments you'd think they've built churches to Buxton and his baseball career. So if nothing else, you're trying to balance the boat and I appreciate that. But contracts are not just given based on what a player has done, but the potential reward they provide as well. There is very clear risk to Buxton as you lay out, but there is obviously so much reward too. The Twins can't offer 3/35, it's not enough guarantees. If they cut the term down that far, they have to bump the AAV or it isn't worth it for Buck. By adding more years they've been able to cut down on the AAV, which I think is the better way to go in balancing this risk vs. reward.
  14. TheLeviathan
    Yeah, I agree it wasn't a good example, but there are good examples of contracts that hamstrung a team. Dexter Fowler, Albert Pujols, etc. It can have a demonstrably bad outcome for your team to sign someone who takes a big chunk of your budget and adds nothing. Which is why it's absolute nonsense for some in these threads to suggest 150M guaranteed is the low end of what he'd be offered. No one wants to get Pujols'd. Byron and his agent seem to understand this, which is why we seem to be in a battle of 80M vs. 110M with at least one side expressing optimism we can get a deal done. The Twins are in the ballpark of a fair offer, let's hope they are willing to bridge the gap, even if the risk is high.
  15. TheLeviathan
    I can get behind almost all of this. He is valuable when on the field and I do think the Twins would be making a worthy gamble to give him 100M plus incentives. Where I will disagree is the idea that 15/20M in dead money isn't a problem, it almost certainly would be. But I believe it is a gamble worth taking if you can keep the guarantees around 15M per year. Even then, I wouldn't put good odds on us looking back at the contract in 2026 and feeling good about it.
  16. TheLeviathan
    I'd be guaranteeing 52M. If Byron Buxton thought he could guarantee himself a lot more than what the Twins are offering.....they wouldn't be actively negotiating around the known offers. As Hayes implied in his story, the team and Byron agree on large components of the contract the team offered. That alone should tell people what the actual market might pay. Turning down close to 100M has a very high risk of being the last time that much money is on the table for him.
  17. TheLeviathan
    I think we are negotiating against our own difficult situation more than the rest of the league. Mike's 3/45 idea seems right for the market so if I'm the Twins I offer 7/91 with easy incentives to double that by PAs. But I also demand a 4th year opt out as safety against his risks. The Twins would basically be offering double what anyone else would guarantee for his risk level so I feel like that is a fair compromise.
  18. TheLeviathan
    I can see not loving some of these deals considering we are packaging two players, but getting 32nd and 68th best prospects in the same deal is hard to call "light" either. Most teams literally can't offer anything as good or better than that.
  19. TheLeviathan
    I would listen, but I don't think anyone is going to pay enough to make me move a versatile, good fielder, good hitter with a good contract.
  20. TheLeviathan
    It is absolutely all over the two threads. You haven't, which is why I engaged with your totally reasonable 3/45 idea.
  21. TheLeviathan
    3 and 45 is 15M base. 7 and 80 is 11.5M base. It's not that off, especially depending on the incentives. Do I understand why Buxton turns it down? Absolutely. Do I want a piece of whatever delicious intoxicant people are using to suggest he can get 150M guaranteed? Also absolutely.
  22. TheLeviathan
    3/45 with attainable incentives doesn't seem that different than what we know they offered though right? Certainly not insultingly different considering it literally guarantees nearly double that much money. (At a lower AAV of course, but that's the trade off)
  23. TheLeviathan
    Well, we know they went from 7/73 to 7/80 right? Sounds like they guaranteed another 1M per season. We don't know what the offers and incentives were and that makes a huge difference in evaluating things. Where I disagree with you is what the market will yield. Buxton will not get 7 years unless he takes a huge hit in guarantees (much like the offer structure we see). If he takes short term deals he might get a good AAV, but if the injuries persist he may not get another deal. That's the risk, but I guarantee you that Buxton will not get 150M guaranteed. No chance. Too many posters here seem to be too close to the situation for an objective analysis.
  24. TheLeviathan
    I encourage you to find Van's laundry list of lost games on the way to the hundreds and hundreds of lost games by Buxton. I don't care if they are nagging or not, its brutal. I agree about his age being a major positive for Buck, but his game is built on speed. There is no profile of a player more likely to decline with age than one whose game is built on speed. Buxton's hitting has been great in only a smattering or the smattering of at-bats he has actually been healthy. Without his speed, Buxton is a significantly less valuable player. And his speed will decline.
  25. TheLeviathan
    Teams that don't offer anything close to fair market don't often get counter-offers. Your idea of the market does not seem accurate to the actual, current market.
×
×
  • Create New...