Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

TheLeviathan

Old-Timey Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    21,583

  • 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. TheLeviathan
    My theory would be that when guys are feasting, their huge surge in production has a less meaningful impact on wins and losses because some of that surge is probably surplus that doesn't really decide games. But long stretches of awful play can have an impact.
  2. TheLeviathan
    Why does it matter how people remember his seasons in five years? We spent the first two months of this season with a sub .600 Dozier hitting in prime positions in the lineup. We spent the last three months (when we were fringe contenders) with a slightly better, but still pretty bad, Brian Dozier hitting in those same spots. I don't think anyone has shown evidence either way, so I'm going to go with what is the most intuitive: feast or famine guys are probably less valuable than guys less prone to erratic production. But I'd be really curious to get an answer on that.
  3. TheLeviathan
    Depends what I'm taking in it's place I suppose. Guys that are this feast or famine aren't ones I feel very comfortable building a team around.
  4. TheLeviathan
    You're going to pay for a lot of DL time next season if you offer him arb.....
  5. TheLeviathan
    I would like to see more FA spending when appropriate. I'd like the next time we're contending to pull that Cliff Lee type of trade from years ago. So I'm with you, but the timing and the context are important. I don't think the Twins are in a spot where making moves like that would be prudent. They need to be aggressive adding pitching this offseason, but that price is likely going to have to be paid via trade rather than cash. At least this year.
  6. TheLeviathan
    Except we'd have only a few more wins, no Buxton and Berrios and more, and be committed to Grienke for boatloads of money. Those few extra wins don't seem worth it.
  7. TheLeviathan
    You realize the vast difference between the two sides of the trade you're proposing right? It's not like that it's a straight swap. You'd have to add Buxton, 100+ million at least over the next few years, and several other prospects (like Berrios or Gonsalves and more) before that swap would be equivalent. So....I'm not sure what you're trying to say.
  8. TheLeviathan
    Every year teams do this, there are more teams that don't achieve a World Series than do. By and large all-in moves fail. That doesn't mean there aren't times to try them. Even if your odds are always more on the side of failure, there are times to try anyway. But there are also times when you try and you shouldn't have and then you fail (as was pretty much inevitable) and you've possibly done serious damage to your long term chances.
  9. TheLeviathan
    I agree, you have to see yourself for what you are. Even if that means you don't like the answer. I agree that they clearly didn't know what they were doing on a number of fronts, at the same time they did exactly what many here would've wanted us to do - aggressively improve the major league team. The problem was that Arizona wasn't really ready for that and has some systemic issues that prevent any real success. (They seem, like us, totally unable to find pitching internally) They concentrated on the wrong areas. Where they should have been trying to improve their organizational framework for identifying and developing pitching, they chose instead to throw money and prospects as a fix. I've always seen money and trades as the way you supplement or complement. Not as a particularly effective bread and butter strategy.
  10. TheLeviathan
    Part of the problem is getting teams to recognize what they are. How often do we sit here and have to argue that the team should be rebuilding? Or acting like a rebuilder? Only to have people pop on and dismiss the notion altogether. You'll have some that look at any situation, regardless of talent and outlook, and say "78 wins is better than 77, to hell with 2018". I think that's part of the thinking that was flawed in Arizona. Again, read your context and understand where to attack to make yourself better.
  11. TheLeviathan
    Your "aim high" analogy makes more sense if you imagine aiming a bazooka at your house to get the bird nesting under the roof. Yeah, you MAY get the bird, but for sure you're getting your house too. I appreciate, however, you helping to make the point to alarp that I was just arguing. Under the guise of suggesting the alternative to spending your assets like a drunk sailor is the Twins nickel and diming, you completely miss that there is a vast middle ground of sanity that is far more advisable. I think being a smart GM is a lot like being the smart manager of anything: know when to press and when to back off. Read the context of your situation and act accordingly. Always slow-footing and never taking risks isn't reading the context. Charging like a bull into every opportunity isn't either.
  12. TheLeviathan
    I don't know, we had a 7-10 page thread in which the bulk of the commentators defended the Oakland Donaldson deal. You'd be surprised what side of things people will stand. We've also had a near annual "The White Sox are gonna be awesome!" thread. There are people that will commend aggression for aggression's sake under the guise of "you should always try to win more games". I don't think all of Arizona's moves were as clearly mistakes at the time as you seem to think they were.
  13. TheLeviathan
    But when you are so singularly focused you risk these sorts of mistakes. There is a lot of chatter here about always trying to win and pushing all your chips in. The problem is that unless you win every move you expose yourself to huge risks with long term ramifications.
  14. TheLeviathan
    Exactly. Which is why shopping, and hopefully finding a buyer for, Dozier should be the primary objective of this offseason.
  15. TheLeviathan
    Well, I could ask you the same question - how do you know those players are going to cost something reasonable? The demands, at the deadline for Miller, were said to be extremely high. Hughes doesn't get the benefit of the doubt because the injury he's coming back from, coupled with his age, and his velocity pre-injury makes the odds ridiculously high against him returning. The facts on player decline, especially in the middle infield, are pretty clear. Could he buck that trend? Sure, but why plan on that? Again, even assuming Dozier would accept that extension until he's 36 and even assuming you could spend money in FA to get an ace (Cueto is the exception for spending, generally if you're going to recommend to "buy an ace" you're talking about hundreds of millions of dollars)....is that really the smart or best bet? To hope that Dozier keeps hitting 40 home runs until he's older than Mauer is now while banking on the team to be splashy in FA for a pitcher that is likely in his 30s? In the meantime the pitching is still a disaster for next year and all our eggs are in the basket of handing money to people to join a terrible team while simultaneously hoping Dozier is the exception to general aging trends. Why would you bet on that course of action as opposed to maximizing Dozier's value by getting several (and at least one elite) good prospects instead?
  16. TheLeviathan
    What's getting tired is taking a serious argument and arguings things that aren't going to happen constitutes an alternative. Dozier wouldn't sign that extension with a terrible team if it continued to roll out bad pitching. We aren't going to spend 250M+ on a 30 something ace. These things aren't happening. They're not on the menu of available choices. Shelby Miller isn't going to come cheap. Liriano is going to cost you Gonsalves or some other comparable talent. Hughes isn't someone I'd count on for anything other than showing up for rehab. Meanwhile you want to bank on 30+ year old Dozier hitting 40 home runs instead. It's just unwise. Really, really unwise.
  17. TheLeviathan
    No one is going to try to improve their team by trading a current ace for Dozier. And are you seriously banking on signing an ace after next season to fix the pitching? You're literally advocating for the strategy of punting on improving the pitching until 2017 and find that to be a wise idea? Dozier will be at least 31 and that extension you mentioned will cost you an insane amount of money to extend him past the age of 35. (Likely well past it) So you want to hand Dozier what is likely (in your scenario where he's still a beast and producing until he's 32) 100M dollars and then hand an ace another 200-250M within a year? As long as we're living in a fantasy world can I have a cookie and a million dollars in your plan?
  18. TheLeviathan
    You realize we pitched the Milones, Nolascos, and Deans in part because some of the guys on the list you just posted were either not starters, not good enough to be starters, or hurt.....right? Now let's talk the reality of your position: There are no aces available in FA. You'll have to trade for one if you want one. Unless you plan to trade Berrios, Buxton, Kepler, or Sano (since you've ruled out Dozier) - you're essentially ruling out an ace. You're proposing we walk into 2016 (and 2017 and 2018) with nothing to hope for internally to improve the team but Berrios and probably Gonsalves. You'll ask Dozier to play his 30 year old and 31 year old seasons with a pitching staff consisting of "meh" Gibson, the hope of Berrios, the cross your fingers he can come back resurrection of May as a starter, and an aging Ervin Santana. And maybe, just maybe, Gonsalves debuts sometime late 2017. The guy you are so desperate to keep (even if he continues this Ruthian production) is wasted on a team that can't get anyone out. And you wasted the opportunity to actually fix the biggest issue (the pitching) because you just had to hold on to him. And one more thing, I can almost guarantee in two years if the Twins listen to you that you'll be singing a different tune because it will be so obvious that the course of action you're recommending was short sighted.
  19. TheLeviathan
    Almost as difficult as rebuilding an entire pitching staff.....
  20. TheLeviathan
    But you want to highlight a deal with Rosario and add other prospects. Sorry Dave, that is a video game trade idea. Adding someone like May doesn't help us for at least 3-4 seasons down the line and is a risky manuever. Frankly, as far as I'm concerned, Rosario is the starting LF next year. I'd rather keep him around as Buxton insurance (that kid has hardly been durable) and find other ways to add pitching. Again, Dozier has been wonderful for the last three months. A binge of epic proportions. He was also flirting with an OPS of around .600 in May and nearly into June. He's 29. He won't be here more than two more years. How many more glaring, neon-lit red flags for "DEAL ME NOW!" does there have to be? If there was ever a sell high moment, it'll come in about two months time. The Dodgers, maybe even the Cardinals, Cubs, Pirates, Mets, Red Sox, and possibly others might all be able to offer us something interesting for Dozier. We should be shopping him hard. And I wouldn't set the bar at getting an ace. I'd set the bar at getting a guy with clear #2 potential and more. Like Berrios. And I'd want a couple other young pieces (pitching or catching) as well.
  21. TheLeviathan
    So now you're advocating the ol' video game trade of offering one so-so player and a load of crap for a better player? C'mon Dave, reality is begging for you to join it. Rosario isn't going to net much of anything.
  22. TheLeviathan
    There are lots of possibilities, you never know what club is going to try and push. I don't think anyone here is advocating to hand him away. But he MUST be shopped aggressively and should be sold if you can get a good return that can help this team in the next 1-3 years.
  23. TheLeviathan
    I really dislike sitting here looking at depth charts online in September and deciding who does or does not have an opening at 2B or an interest in adding a talent like Dozier. And even if there doesn't appear to be a logical landing place, it should change nothing about what the Twins try to do. Whether they pull it off is another issue.
  24. TheLeviathan
    Trading Rosario, right now, doesn't move the needle much. He's a handy guy to have on this team as a multi-dimensional fourth OF and starter in a pinch. He won't net you much in a trade. Dozier could net you value in a deal. Dozier is approaching 30 and will be a player you absolutely, under no circumstances, extend when his deal expires. He, as recently as 3 months ago, should have been hitting 7th or not at all in the lineup. The next two years, if a team believes he can keep this up, would be highly valuable to a contender. Use that to improve the part of this team that has a bleak outlook next year. It's the only trade chip we have that can actually move the needle for this team.
  25. TheLeviathan
    Carter struck out 25% of the time. Walker is striking out 40%. So extrapolate his MLB numbers as significantly worse than Carter's. That's not a major league baseball player.
×
×
  • Create New...