TheLeviathan
-
Posts
21,582 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
49
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 TheLeviathan
-
There is no alternative, there is nothing wrong with what they do. I'm talking about our perceptions of it. We treat them as experts, when they are really just aggregators. And there is a difference.
-
But you're assuming how much they talk to scouts. Knowing just 30 players on each team is 900 players. And these guys often rank them in groups of 20-30. And that says nothing of amatuer players. Or current players. I'm merely suggesting the scope of what we think they do is pretty damn impossible.
-
To put it in teaching terms - we treat these guys like they know everyone a mile deep and an inch wide, when instead they've done it a mile wide and an inch deep.
-
If only someone had pointed out that homophobia being mixed in with this was inevitable.....
-
It's not that they don't know what they're talking about at some level, it's that the stock put into what they're talking about is overblown. You made a ton of assumptions in that first paragraph. Just consider for example the scope of what you say they are doing. They are literally cataloging thousands of players. There aren't enough hours in the day to have more than a small sample of experience with each player. What I would grant is that Law or Sickles might know a horde of good scouts that they collect information from and have found a way to simplify and disseminate that information. Otherwise, what we seem to think these gurus do is physically impossible. If I'm a regional manager of a chain of hundreds of stores, I can call each manager for a report on their store and I can talk competently about them based on that brief conversation and some data I have...but how well do I know each store? Is that even possible? I can have expertise in the business and if you put me in charge of 6 of them I'd be really good at it. But to know hundreds intimately? But yet, that's how we treat prospect lists and prospect gurus.
-
Honestly, I don't put a ton of stock into the "experts" either. Sickles has probably seen Gonsalves once or twice and his basing his expert opinions on the definition of a small sample. I'll watch numbers like they do, but I'm not convinced their insights are all that important. I largely think their entire field (nation wide analyst of prospects) is overstated. They really aren't that different than your average person sitting at home looking at stats.
-
Roger Ailes died. There may be few people on the planet that have influenced politics and journalism more than he did. (But not in a good way)
-
That's a shame, I loved his work. Audioslave, his remake of Billy Jean, Soundgarden.....the dude was super talented.
-
Perhaps, but the pitching situation is pretty dire. I think it's possible to say that it isn't "barren" while at the same time saying it's among the worst in baseball is not inaccurate. After that the nitty gritty is really about personal preferences for how you value things IMO.
-
Ha! Not what I meant, but yes, that will help too.
-
Romero taking a step forward would obviously help. We're in the bottom third because we basically have no one close that projects to be a significant impact, so if one guy changes that it changes the equation for sure. Prospect lists are volatile for that very reason. And one reason why I, personally, don't really care that much about them. I'll monitor our minor leaguers but I wait for them to start advancing and showing development before I really buy-in. And right now, on our pitching side, there is very little to buy into. I'm bought in on the upside Romero has, but beyond that I think things look fairly bleak. But that could change by August. Hell, it could change by June.
-
I guess I'm confused why "no better than 20" and "Bottom 5" are all that different. It all seems we agree they aren't very good on that front, 5th worst vs. 9th worst seems like a weird hill to die on.
-
This may sound odd, and I hate to admit giving them clicks, but I've found Breitbart is almost an essential place to check in to from time to time. Fox News is bad, but they look like playful kittens next to the frothing-at-the-mouth badger that is Breitbart.
-
It's amazing to me just how quickly and thoroughly Republicans have abandoned both ideology and country in the name of party. It's astounding.
-
Well of course it's to your advantage. It's also fair to point out that most people put depth below high end talent. And they do so for a reason, one is much easier to attain than the other. (And obtain as well) Either way, we don't disagree. I think the term "barren" is inappropriate, but we're also not as good as we should be even with the graduations that have happened.
-
Well, numbers are great and all, but high profile guys are high profile for a reason. They're less likely to bust and more likely to impact. Numbers are nice, but it's a low bar to clear.
-
No, that's fine, I was just curious how it broke down. The way you phrased it made it sound like a quantity over quality measure. I would venture to guess most analysts would still say the quality of the Cubs system is a decent margin better than ours. At least the rankings I've seen seem to indicate that.
-
I have to ask for more detail. How about B+ or better? Having 10 B and B- and 4 that are B+ or better is not the same as 8 B+ or better and 4 B/B-. Or however it breaks down. One elite talent is worth quite a bit more than a handful of B- guys. But I don't know how that breaks down.
-
The Cubs also went into the Cuban market with much more frequency. I didn't bring up the Cubs comparison, some other poster did. I can only respond to their example. Relax. The Cubs went over once and were willing to go get Soler and several others outside of that. Again, every high upside player counts a ton and those moves represent a large portion of the difference between the two clubs right now.
-
The Cubs also smartly turned a one year FA contract into Jake Arrieta. And when you're talking about high upside pitchers, every one counts a lot. Right now maybe you could argue Santana/Berrios is a wash with Lester/Hendricks, but we have no Arrieta and far less prospect capital than they do. And that, largely, is due to much more aggressive international spending. Something Terry Ryan treated like the plague.
-
Right and if prospect for prospect trades were actually a thing that might help, but they're not. Our pitching is in a hole that is going to take some good fortune to dig out of. If even one of Jay or Stewart looked legit, it changes the whole dynamic. But that's not where we sit today.
-
Hell, when TK was doing broadcasts I could barely go 3 hours without him wearing on me.....
-
I wouldn't call it barren. I wouldn't call it bountiful either. It's alright, but it should probably be a bit better than that.
-
I definitely think Ortiz was the victim of rigidity with the Twins and we as Twins fans were victims in not getting to enjoy his abilities. But I don't think the Twins deliberately tried to sabotage him, just that the way the Twins were coaching him caused the messages to get mixed with frustration from both sides. It's ok to admit. Other teams have to this happen to them too. Sometimes you need to hear the same thing said by someone else. And Tom Kelly, for as smart as he is, definitely struck me as the kind of guy that could wear on you.
-
Chaffetz has been one of the most loyal hounds and he's issuing subpoenas/requests. So, that's something I guess.
