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
    Sure. But if the argument is (and it was) that they traded for cost controlled service time, Busenitz and Meyer are equal. There is slightly more potential in Meyer, but it's mostly shadows of what once was. Based on what he's actually done we should probably just bury that potential and stop pretending it's still around.
  2. TheLeviathan
    Right there with you. What is the point of that? Because what was said above is that 6 years of team control is valuable and that's what the Angels traded for. I guess, if their spit in the wind hope that he'll ever be anything other than a chronically injured, erratic player ever reverses, than that could be a relevant point. It's just unlikely because A) his chronic injuries have frequently involved his shoulder (pretty much the worst thing you could have as a pitcher) and he'll be 27 by the time next season starts. I understand not liking Santiago. But let's be honest about who Alex Meyer is as of August 2016. So, yeah, "6 years of team control" is about the most valuable thing you can say about him at this point. And it's a terrible argument.
  3. TheLeviathan
    It's true if your argument for Meyer's value is limited to team control.
  4. TheLeviathan
    Santiago has certainly been bad so far, that doesn't necessarily change things. 6 years of Alex Meyer matters about as much as me offering my services to the team for six years. Hell, to this point, by not even being on the team I might have helped more than Meyer has to this point.
  5. TheLeviathan
    This. And then the team doubled down on it's stupidity by teasing May with having a shot at the rotation that never really existed. You teach pitchers for years to be creatures of habit and then you give them little to no transition to a totally different set of habits and you expect it to just work out? I know it does sometimes, but this team always seems to go 0 to 60 with these pitcher conversions and that's just unwise.
  6. TheLeviathan
    The list of starters we chose to roll with instead of May only makes the decision more embarrassing.
  7. TheLeviathan
    I'm surprised we came up with even one "pro" to this idea.....
  8. TheLeviathan
    I can see that, I'm just not sure how robust the other options were. Having Suzuki and Murphy seemed like an acceptable gamble to me, relative to other options. Certainly the price for that gamble is one I'm on board with.
  9. TheLeviathan
    We sold low (Hicks) and bought low (Murphy). It's not like it was a bad deal, we just didn't get lucky. We certainly didn't lose anything. Hicks is the hitless scrub many of us thought he was.
  10. TheLeviathan
    You don't think playing in front of tens of thousands of people, many of whom are watching your at-bats with extra scrutiny, isn't pressure? Especially compared to playing in some po-dunk AAA town where the best people can do most nights is check a box score? Look, the kid needs to make fundamental adjustments to his swing. I'd like him to do that where the only focus he has is that task. AAA seems better served for that function. I mean, hell, what are the minor league for if not to coach needs exactly like this? If it was as simple as some of you think to just adjust at the big league level, why would we ever put anyone in the minors for any length of time? I want him focused on his approach and his swing, not thinking about a major league slider or splitter or anything else. Let that come later when he has the basics fixed.
  11. TheLeviathan
    It's not that he needs to face AAA pitching, it's that he needs to change his swing. It might be easier to do that when you take all the other pressures of the big leagues off of his shoulders.
  12. TheLeviathan
    I wish his swing would've been shortned, I don't know, three years ago or so.....
  13. TheLeviathan
    Well, technically, we did move 4. Again, my point is expecting four trades doesn't really have much of a precedent. And I say that because I think it reflects the difficulty of making trades happen. We know from the Astros hack that professional General Managers often call each other like that one guy we all know in fantasy leagues that offers you preposterously horrible trades on a semi-regular basis. So to cut through the stupidity and make things happen is more difficult than we often think. Call the grade whatever you want, but honestly, making three trades happen (in and of itself) is pretty damn active and impressive. Hopefully they pan out.
  14. TheLeviathan
    Let's be clear, many of the cogs in this offensive turn-around are not ones we were planning on - Kepler, Escobar, Vargas, Suzuki, Grossman, even Rosario. It's great to see this, but man do we need Sano and Buxton to join in.
  15. TheLeviathan
    You're still talking about a calculation based on a variety of valuations that are predictive. Yes, it does a better job de-emphasizing those stats, but doesn't eliminate them. If you're asking me to compare two pitchers over the course of five years to see who has performed the best, I'm not going to use WAR. I'm going to use ERA+. Just like i won't use WAR for hitters either, I'll use wrc+. It's just a simple, plain fact that Santiago has outperformed Nolasco by a sizable margin for at least 5 seasons. And it's hard to take any argument seriously that doesn't accept that.
  16. TheLeviathan
    Using WAR to compare Santiago and Nolasco is intentionally stacking the deck. WAR relies on FIP or xFIP and those stats consistently tell us Nolasco should be better than he is, but he is consistently worse. And has been over a very large sample. Santiago is the exact opposite. The career ERA+ is 107 to 89. That tells a much better story about what the two pitchers have actually done, rather than what best predicts what they should do. And there is a plenty large enough sample size to confirm the difference.
  17. TheLeviathan
    Yes, because your summary involves the creation of some person who shares the last name of Alex Meyer who appears to be good at baseball. I'm going to pretend your pretend person's name is Ajax Meyer. Sounds cooler.
  18. TheLeviathan
    I did reference the link and quoted Bernadino's phrasing. And, even in the best case for your argument, if we are actually picking up his money regardless of where he goes, he's still a worse pitcher for the same price.
  19. TheLeviathan
    Maybe, but again your contention is built on an assumption about 2017. Evaluate the deal for what it is right now. Nolasco and Meyer for a better starter and no extra money. That's a win.
  20. TheLeviathan
    So, you concede he is better, but not better enough? They dealt Nolasco and Meyer and got a better starter with no extra financial commitments. Again, prior to the deadline, such a notion would've been absurd. And yet we did.
  21. TheLeviathan
    Rosenthal and Bernadino's phrasing definitely don't match up. But even if Rosenthal is right, and their money obligations are equal, there is a MUCH better chance based on the last five years that Santiago is a more valuable player. Because, you know, he hasn't totally sucked as a pitcher.
  22. TheLeviathan
    They're paying the same amount in payroll, but they are doing so with a better, younger starter in the fold and at the cost of a player who they have given up on. If you had told me, pre-deadline, that the Twins could trade Nolasco and Meyer and get a better, younger starter in return with no payroll increase - I'd have said you were a crazy person. Yet here we are.
  23. TheLeviathan
    That's certainly not the way it's phrased. The phrase is always that we "send cash" to offset things. I'd welcome some link in detail explaining how the Twins are paying this, but the phrasing clearly indicates that the Twins are basically sending money to the Angels. Not picking up his pay checks as you guys seem to be implying.
  24. TheLeviathan
    My understanding is they are, according to Bernadino, "sending along" 4M. I don't think they are directly paying Ricky Nolasco, unless you have some other source?
  25. TheLeviathan
    So...now you're going to argue the Pohlads wouldn't be involved in cutting a check for 15-20M for a buyout? C'mon. Hell, I'm shocked they paid as much as they did.
×
×
  • Create New...