Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

TheLeviathan

Old-Timey Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    20,793

  • 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
    2/20 seems like a rather non-serious offer IMO. Not that they have to sign him or anything, but I guess I don't see the point in even offering that.
  2. TheLeviathan
    I like Dozier, he's proven me wrong with his improvements in consistency, but I'd be really hesitant to give him more than 3 years. Also, this offseason makes it really difficult to predict next offseason. I'd put the odds at resigning Dozier about equal to a work stoppage and just about anything in between.
  3. TheLeviathan
    Of course it's all about the pitching. But you don't need your "ace" to be the one that pitches that way. For as great as Kershaw has been, he's largely been a playoff dud. Whereas other, lesser, pitchers have thrived. And from year to year things are pretty erratic. 5%? C'mon. 50% of the teams in the last 6 years haven't had an ace. That's just the last 6, your 5% is sort of silly on the face of it. Even if taken as hyperbole. And much of your point is unrealistic about how available and plentiful actual aces are. I believe we missed a chance at one this offseason (and was highly critical of it), but there aren't enough aces to go around. And those that have them rarely let them go. And sometimes when you have one you still get beat. (See: Johan Santana's run here. Or Chris Sale last year. Or, again, pretty much every time Kershaw has pitched) You should always go get great players when you can. But you don't need an "ace" any more than you need "at least 40 homeruns" from your 1B. You need as many good or great players you can get and you need them to show up when the small sample kicks in.
  4. TheLeviathan
    I hope Garver is the regular starter by July 1st. That'll be a very good thing for this franchise if he earns that spot.
  5. TheLeviathan
    Well, after years of being here I feel pretty confident saying that is the consensus. We just had people taking issue with Darvish being called an "ace" a few weeks ago. (Darvish is a much better pitcher and did it in the AL no less) Of course our definitions all vary to degrees, but we seem to be consistently high in our expectations for what each slot in a rotation should look like. We did this for years when we called Scott Baker a #4 and Radke a #3. We don't have any damn clue what a #1 is or a #5 is. We all arbitrarily come up with definitions and the vast majority of them are in a fantasy land of expectations. For me this question comes down to the way it was phrased: Do we want an ace to help win a WS? Absolutely. And there is ample evidence to support it. Do we need (implying we cannot win a WS without one) an ace to win? Absolutely not. And there is ample evidence for that too. Best to add as many good to great players as you can. Which is why LoMo and Odorizzi were great moves. And why the Twins should make Lynn or Cobb happen tomorrow if they can.
  6. TheLeviathan
    I guess SF depends on how you feel about MadBum. I think he's clearly an ace and pitched that way in the playoffs, so I wouldn't count them. But when you can point to 3 of the last 6 teams and say "no ace", the whole idea you need one gets thrown out real quick. Personally, I view Cueto as an ace and maybe even Lester as well. My standard for "ace" is a bit more reflective of what you posted and I'd say Ervin did pitch like an ace last year. But I believe what people mean by "ace" is a level of dominance the vast majority of teams simply don't have. And the ones that do don't win the World Series every year. Multiple teams of recent note have shown how depth and surprise performances are far more important than the names you pencil in to start. And really.....is that surprising? The playoffs are nothing more than a glorified small sample size - we should expect a great deal of randomness. You insulate yourself from that from getting as many good and great players on your roster as you can.
  7. TheLeviathan
    What you need is for guys to pitch like aces. And that isn't always your ace. The 2015 Royals did not have an ace. (I guarantee you this board would have called Cueto a "good number 2 despite what any numbers he posted say) 2013 the Red Sox "ace" was Jon Lester 2011 the "ace" was the husk of Chris Carpenter Those are three examples in just the last handful of years. None of those pitchers would have satisfied people here as "aces".
  8. TheLeviathan
    I don't think ace = good pitching. You can have an ace and four terrible pitchers and not have a good staff. I'm a big believer that depth and luck wins World Series.
  9. TheLeviathan
    From statistical models, Dozier's skill set might be even more productive hitting in other spots in the lineup. Assuming, of course, that his production is the same regardless of his position in the lineup.
  10. TheLeviathan
    Sometimes managing people requires you to give in a bit. If Molitor hits him 4th and he sulks through it we can all agree it's 100% Dozier's fault, but will that save Molitor's job when the Twins lose a bunch of games? Doubt it. Then we'll blame Molitor for not getting Dozier to accept it. I know the stats show a "clear" path for the lineup, but people and their emotions are a variable we can't yet account for.
  11. TheLeviathan
    It's amazing the guy couldn't get a stable run here as a DH. Whether fair or not, he always seemed to get yanked at the most inexplicable and unfortunate times. Maybe he would have been nothing, but I always hate to see a guy that flashed some potential let go without ever getting the kind of opportunity to prove things one way or the other.
  12. TheLeviathan
    No. But he's a clear upgrade at a great price.
  13. TheLeviathan
    Right, it'd just be ideal if Granite was RH.
  14. TheLeviathan
    Well, I agree we don't need a defensive replacement, but we may need to have Granite ready because Buxton has hardly been the beacon of health. I do wish we had another right-handed option though.
  15. TheLeviathan
    Well, if the Odorizzi trade also results in Cobb and LoMo I'd say that move becomes even more amazing. I like that they are continuing to spend money they should be spending to improve the team.
  16. TheLeviathan
    I wasn't necessarily saying the leg kick was a bad thing. But you don't see many like that last until the majors.
  17. TheLeviathan
    Minor league deal...that's fine.
  18. TheLeviathan
    That's an awfully big leg kick.
  19. TheLeviathan
    Fine, no one has said those exact words, but what else are we supposed to glean about Sano from these 11 pages? What is the main idea of this little conversation? It sure seems to be - Miguel Sano is lazy. Miguel Sano doesn't care. Miguel Sano is selfish. We make assumption about his habits based on next to nothing. And, even worse, the frequency with which these attacks happen sure doesn't make me feel like putting a positive spin on the attacks. Eventually, you're attacking the person and not the habits. And we simply don't know enough about his habits to start getting personal. And, as i said before, it sure didn't take much to launch this 11 page thread. That's not a ringing endorsement for how people are going about this.
  20. TheLeviathan
    Because I don't know if he's not putting his best foot forward. I don't know if he's trying and failing, not trying, or trying and succeeding just fine. I know very little about that, as I suspect is the same for you. I refuse to crucify the guy for something that, at best, gets whispered vaguely to the beat writers. Hell, it didn't take more than one odd picture for people to declare him an obese 290 pound slob. It seems to me that people are looking to declare him lazy and any nugget they can use is happily accepted. I prefer not to indulge in that. I hope the Twins are being serious with him about conditioning and I hope Miguel is taking it seriously as well.
  21. TheLeviathan
    I'm going to say this as delicately as I can: If we want to play the "read between the lines" game, this thread might lead us to some awful dark conclusions about some of our posters. I'd caution how much you want to do that sort of thing. You don't know Miguel Sano and you don't know the way in with Paul Molitor meant that. Trying to turn it into another bit of evidence that Sano is a terrible, lazy, waste of a human being seems really unnecessary.
  22. TheLeviathan
    No one is talking about BP because he's mashing. BP has come up because there is video of him doing it where he looks to be in about the same shape he was in last year. That fact flies in the face of what some have suggested here that he ballooned to the point of never being able to play third base again. The video refutes a lot of characterizations of his conditioning and reinforces what some first hand observers noted. It has nothing to do with how he is "mashing".
  23. TheLeviathan
    This is fine. I also hope he takes the fitness advice from the Twins seriously, I just won't get caught up in hyperbole about his weight like much of this thread devolved into.
  24. TheLeviathan
    Miguel Sano is accused of doing something he should be ashamed of and criticized for. Why the hell do we have to have a bi-monthly rip fest about his weight? What makes people want to conjure up those criticisms with little or no evidence to back them up? The BP video is up-thread, I'd like to hear someone tell me with a straight face that he looks like the bloated 290 pounder that some in this thread were accusing him of being.
  25. TheLeviathan
    Here is an example. I'm just not seeing anything there to panic over.
×
×
  • Create New...