Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

TheLeviathan

Old-Timey Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    21,007

  • 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

2026 Minnesota Twins Draft Pick Tracker

Forums

Blogs

Events

Store

Downloads

Gallery

Everything posted by TheLeviathan

  1. TheLeviathan
    I'm trying to convince myself that it doesn't seem likely.
  2. TheLeviathan
    Going back two years seems like a poor sample. Take the last decade and look at how the actual top-end pitchers performed. I used to believe the same thing you do, but the stats are absolutely unsupportive of that opinion. The best ingredient to winning a World Series is a lot of luck and enough guys getting hot at the same time. Or basically the ingredients for success in any small sample.
  3. TheLeviathan
    In addition to Willihammer point, I think you'd be surprised if you looked back at how ineffective many aces have been relative to some schmo with a magical postseason. Bumgarner was amazing in the playoffs, but that is far from common. The last time the Giants won the pennant it wasn't Bum, Cain, or Lincecum that lead the way.....it was Ryan Vogelsong. A guy all of us cringe at adding today. I'd recommend anyone that believes "Ace = World Series" to go back and look at just how very untrue that idea is. They are, however and as you point out, extremely valuable to being a better baseball team over the long season.
  4. TheLeviathan
    There you go, now you used the stat correctly. And I agree, Laroche is a better player. I didn't need convincing, I just found it amusing to see WAR used incorrectly again after being reassured everyone knows how to use it. It's not good short-hand. In fact, WAR is AWFUL short-hand.
  5. TheLeviathan
    Jay, these are the same thing. Just one makes you feel better about it by how you phrase it. Let me be clear, I don't think we've wrecked any careers or anything like that, but we have deliberately played worse players with less upside for whatever reason you want to cite. We seem to be in prime position to do so again in a few months and I hope that doesn't happen.
  6. TheLeviathan
    I'm making no claim on the point. I like the Laroche signing and think he'll be a good player for them. That doesn't change the fact that comparing one year of WAR data for two players is just a fundamental misuse of the stat.
  7. TheLeviathan
    1) The study has the same problem for all the teams and the sample is large enough to draw pretty reasonable conclusions. Namely - the Twins are definitely on the less aggressive side of things. Particularly as the player gets to the upper minors. 2) The Twins adding Ervin Santana is not the problem. The Twins' tendency to default to a guy like Mike Pelfrey over Trevor May is. My issue in this thread started with the pollyanne arguments that there would be a true competition for the spots that are available. (I think there is one, two tops) Given this team's decision making for quite some time, I have significant doubts that will happen. As Nick said earlier - Trevor May should walk into ST the favorite and I couldn't feel any less confident in that. That's the problem. Not Ervin Santana but the Twins ridiculous penchant for veteran innings eaters over younger, more talented pitchers. I'm glad we agree about the 5th spot going to Pelf over May and I genuinely hope I'm wrong, but we have a lot of evidence over the years to indicate I'm worried for good reason.
  8. TheLeviathan
    Heh, I think there was a thread not long ago about how often WAR is misused. This thread is wonderful evidence of that.
  9. TheLeviathan
    Here is just a sample of the evidence: these are the names of the pitchers we chose to use over Alex Meyer, Trevor May, or Kyle Gibson the last two years: Yohan Pino, Kevin Correia (or as you might know him in 2015 - Mike Pelfrey), Sam Deduno, Anthony Swarzak, Logan Darnell, Kris Johnson, Scott Diamond, Pedro Hernandez, Andrew Albers, Cole DeVries, Liam Hendricks, and PJ Walters. Now I'll save you the trauma of their numbers, but suffice to say we didn't need to look at these players. We certainly didn't need to look at all of them more than once. We have a definitive pattern of delaying our young players longer than any other team, so suggesting otherwise is demonstrably false. We do it and we do it frequently and moreso than basically any other team in the league. (At least in the last 5-8 years) I think it's comical that we defend the way in which we've handled some young starters the last few years under the guise that we "had some AAAA guys to look at" and then champion the improvement of the rotation because we won't be using AAAA guys. Seems like a self-inflicted wound the team repeatedly has not learned from and one I'm not prepared to believe they've learned from until I see the behavior change. Until we ACTUALLY waive Pelfry or option Milone out of ST for May or Meyer this seems like wishful thinking. And, hey, I get the argument with Meyer. Trevor May? If Pelfrey goes north in that spot over him it's nothing short of ridiculous.
  10. TheLeviathan
    This is a reflection of how every Sox fan I know feels about their team. The "grass is greener on the other side" version some here are longing for is precisely that. Not that I don't envy and like many of the things they do, it just seems sexier to us because it's the opposite of what we do.
  11. TheLeviathan
    Right, so there is only one spot despite the way you tried to portray the situation just a few posts back. But even more than that....do you really believe that if they are better pitchers through March, April, or even May....that the Twins will just go to them? Mind you, we've seen lopsided evidence to the contrary on this. I want to believe it, but damned if I can.
  12. TheLeviathan
    I'm fine with all that. I'm even ok with the first year approach of clearing the deck for Hicks to start. My question is, why do we do that for hitters and the exact opposite for pitchers?
  13. TheLeviathan
    I'd like to feel that they actually have an equal shot as Milone, Pelfrey, and maybe even Nolasco. Do you honestly feel like they will?
  14. TheLeviathan
    I would suggest they cleared the path intentionally for Hicks. They did the same for Mauer, Morneau, and many others going quite a ways back. The Twins' methods with hitting prospects vs. pitching prospects is almost Dr. Jekyl/Mr. Hyde. It's clearly some kind of organizational philosophy, but what it is and why they do it I'm not sure.
  15. TheLeviathan
    It's interesting to see the Twins' tendencies in comparison to other teams. It might just have been that five year sample of talent, but it does reinforce the perception that most fans have. Thanks for the link!
  16. TheLeviathan
    I'm ok with that, you won't hear me calling for anyone's head based on prospect timelines. I might grumble about wanting to see one guy over another (see: Gibson vs. PJ freaking Walters) but I understand how readiness involves a lot of factors beyond us as fans. I also put a lot of value on guys getting exposure to the next level and tempering expectations about that. All that said, this team is very willing to clear out the roster (to a fault) for Aaron Hicks but Alex Meyer and Trevor May have spin straw into gold before they get shots at a rotation spot? I'm more baffled by the approach than anything. That's why I use the QB "battle" as an example. Everyone knows the backup could go 28-30 with 4 TDs and he's still riding the pine and I get that feeling a lot with young Twins' starters.
  17. TheLeviathan
    Are there really five spots or are four already sewn up short of injury? There is one spot. And again, this isn't about needing depth or injuries coming up or anything like that. It's the belief that these guys will truly be on the team when they are most deserving. I am hopeful that the team is willing to make that bold stride but too often under Ryan it is not the most talented players, but the veterans or those with the most invested in them financially. The notion that Alex Meyer or Trevor May have one of five spots open to them is just ridiculous. They have one spot open to them and they are competing with each other, Tommy Milone, and Mike Pelfrey at the very least.
  18. TheLeviathan
    This is exactly the point I was opposed to and it was clearly imbedded in your previous point as well. His performance as a rookie shouldn't be held against his "readiness" - rookies struggle, even ones that go on to be brilliant players. It's a poor gauge for whether or not they should be up or not. (That goes for the reverse too - a hot start doesn't make them any more ready either as evidenced by Arcia and many, many others)
  19. TheLeviathan
    I really cannot understand this belief that rookies should only come up if they won't struggle. Not only does it not make sense on a number of levels and completely contradict volumes of evidence to the contrary, but this very team consistently calls up hitting prospects far less "ready" all the time. Young players struggle to adjust at every level of advancement but you still have to advance them to know what you have.
  20. TheLeviathan
    I expect Vargas to be this player long-term, certainly. I also expect him to have happen to him what Arcia had in 2014. Guys like Vargas tend to go through a tough adjustment in their second year and I expect that from Vargas this year.
  21. TheLeviathan
    If it's Mike Pelfrey that might be in name only. I just have a hard time sitting here and hearing people say "they'll get their shot!" when it seems like we're talking the clear runner up in the QB "battle". But hey - I thoroughly hope Molly and the new staff prove me wrong.
  22. TheLeviathan
    BABIP alone seems to be a poor way to make such judgements. I'd contend the better case for Escobar and Santana is that multiple years of minor league play indicate last year was an anomaly. I hope I'm wrong because Santana is a fun player to watch and a favorite of mine already, but the vast majority of the time a guy wildly outperforms his track record it isn't something to bet on.
  23. TheLeviathan
    If we want to talk about Gibson, then 2014 isn't the example that would illustrate my point. That would be 2013 when he was passed over in favor of the likes of Pedro Hernandez, Cole Devries, and the immortal PJ Walters.
  24. TheLeviathan
    No, it's not and I didn't mean to imply that it was. I understand how people could disagree within reason on that. What I don't get is why people are harping on posters who think this team is still a non-contender. The Twins have all but acknowledged as much themselves and there are a host of valid reasons to agree with them.
  25. TheLeviathan
    I want to quibble a bit with this. All of us who are Twins fans should hesitate to embrace this just because the organization has shown a strong tendency to not view these as true options. There are default settings that prevent guys like May and Meyer from getting an equal shot at a spot. It reminds me of an NFL coach telling the press there is a "Position Battle" at QB when everyone with a functioning brain stem knows who the starter is. The Twins have to prove to me that they will truly opt for the young kid pitching his butt off over the higher paid veteran before I'll believe it. I want to hope that a new manager will maybe be a change in this regard, but far too often there has been deference to veterans over young players. The only time this team has ever given jobs to young players is when they clear the path for them ala Hicks. So yes, having depth is nice - I just hope the Twins entertain the idea that the depth in AAA is Pelfrey and Milone and not Alex Meyer. (Should he truly earn it and be ready)
×
×
  • Create New...