Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

TheLeviathan

Old-Timey Member
  • 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

  1. The difference is if I endorse a 7 year 150M contract I accept the reality and long term ramifications. I know it's basically a one time deal that will limit further spending for a decade. I do so knowing we have a finite payroll and that deal has major long term implications. Do you? Or does it remain as easy as ever to complain about payroll? See, I also have been vocal in my criticisms, but I'm also very grounded. It's less about how much and more about how the money is spent.
  2. If you open your checkbook once for a 7 year 150M player...are you good then for seven years? You make a deal like that and you need to live with it for seven. And reality is that it takes you out of play for another FA move for most of that contract. This isn't a video game, there are longterm ramifications to this demand we are setting. We have finite resources, even if we all agree to eating into the profits a bit more than we do now.
  3. You often sound like you don't actually think what you say you think about this.
  4. Now we need to define "of note". Because Phil Hughes could qualify. And again, this seems like a weak conclusion relative to what you've said in the past. It's nice to finally have some clarification though. Some of you talk a really, really strong game but this is pretty tepid.
  5. Every offseason? How big should their payroll be and what percentage of it should be signed FAs? I have trouble reckoning your past comments on spending with this post that tries to argue you'd be content with a philosophy that merely doesn't rule it out.
  6. I think I'd be happier if Trump made up the wiretap thing. That he is repeating Info war and Breibart stories is the way scarier truth.
  7. Well, I know this with certainty - I'm not speculating. What I am suggesting is known to happen. You're pulling out speculation, calling it merit, and suggesting it happens most of all. When there are bubble roster spots, we know teams make decisions completely independent of performance. Frequently. And with the players in question never having any control over it.
  8. Fine, but this isn't merit. Bird keeps arguing these things don't happen. That "merit" decides these things most of the time.
  9. How often do you do that? Every year? Just once when you need it? How much of your roster can be composed of guys paid in the top 10% of the league? What should payroll be? These are questions you should answer, not me. Your original statement put no bounds on spending, which I consider to be both unrealistic and unwise. I colorfully described that as drunken soldier spending. So please, you and Mike and everyone else, what's sufficient for the Twins to be spending to make you warm and cozy inside?
  10. That's some of it. I don't know if it's largely that or not. The Hillary hate on that side seems even stronger than the Obama hate.
  11. Every spring players with noticeably less ability and upside are passed over, across the league, in favor of other players. Every spring.
  12. You responded to me and I said I'd rather not spend like a drunken sailor. You then quoted a GM about spending irrationally. I stand by what I said - I don't want to spend like a drunken sailor. FA, for the Twins, will always have to be measured and smart. Even if it becomes more aggressive.
  13. "Can" is a rather misleading conclusion. Of course they "can". Lots of things "can" happen. But that's why your "take it!" thing is nonsense even as a slogan. It's not theirs to take more often than not.
  14. There should be a 40 year rule on remakes. Matrix hasn't even made it 20 years before they are remaking it. Though, Spiderman was remade like 8 times in 6 years, so I guess relatively speaking....
  15. It's funny, I just argued with my grandparents like this yesterday. Started measured, reasoned, factual. I pressed the point on how much more profitable and wealthy everyone becomes when we bring the lowest up and flood the middle class with cash rather than handing the wealthy money. Pointed out that they complain about socialism and then buy pills from Canadian pharmacies. I hit the genetics testing, the waste in the defense budget, and on and on and it was a wall of stupidity. I heard about how Obama hates America, the illegals ruin everything, Benghazi got name dropped about four times, and by the end of it I was told they'd "pray for me". Only deepened my resolve to never vote Republican again. At least for the forseeable future.
  16. It's part of what makes Batman so popular. And one of my favorites.
  17. While the Twins can certainly do more (much more) I think your comparisons are rather flawed. As much as I like Epstein, he's never been held to much of a budget. And when you have that kind of budget you have more room to make mistakes and you can throw reason out the window a little more freely. At some point reality has to be in the equation here a bit. A timely splash? Sure. Dropping 25M on one player every offseason? Not reality. And not wise either.
  18. Except what I listed has nothing to do with how mature they are. How many options they have, how long you can delay their FA, etc. have nothing to do with merit. And these things can and do effect team decisions. Sure, maturity and other things we don't see can as well, but so do things completely outside the control of the player. You and jim seem to keep thrusting the onus on the young player and I'm suggesting to you that the vast majority of the time the decision is made by factors completely uncontrollable by the player and his performance/behavior in spring camp. Chargois might strike out every single guy he faces this spring and still wind up in AAA. Ask Kris Bryant.
  19. Teams use all sorts of reasons to decide their 25 man roster. Service time, contracts, options, etc. And not just the Twins, everybody does it. Merit alone (in meaningless games by the way) is simply false.
  20. I picked an easy, undeniable bit of evidence that "take it!" is a bunch of BS. I tend to be a bit more mild in my cries for getting young players up to play. But I'm not delusional. And "take it!" is pretty delusional as anything other than a slogan too.
  21. I will agree, one year at that price is a reasonable enough gamble. I'm comfortable with that. But this guy has plenty of red flags himself. As long as we also draft the back of 2018 in this year's draft, I'm good with it. I just wouldn't expect much from Murray.
  22. They "can" do lots of things. Did Kris Bryant not "take it!" a couple years ago? Sorry man, but you can't be critical of what Mike said as a slogan and then turn around and offer "take it!" with a straight face. We both know full well there is a lot that goes into those decisions.
  23. Yup....this. I'd spend some in FA, but not the drunken sailor spending that some want.
  24. We have plenty of evidence that your notion that young players can just "take it" by their performance is false as well. To use your terms, that's more of a slogan than a real thing.
  25. Good lord that budget. I mean....jesus.
×
×
  • Create New...