Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

TheLeviathan

Old-Timey Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • 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. TheLeviathan
    Even if that was true, the answer is "yes, it is a flukey coincidence". Also, if all you had to do was field aces to win the World Series, please explain to me how Detroit consistently has lost to inferior pitching staffs year after year? The only truth in the "you have to have an ace!" logic is that, yes, it's better to have elite players than not. But that goes for any position and is really just stating the obvious. Anything more than that is factually inaccurate.
  2. TheLeviathan
    Just to further this point, Seattle only turned it down after Ramos got hurt. Man that was a franchise changing injury.
  3. TheLeviathan
    That's just not true. Every year teams get beat by teams with inferior pitching staffs. Is it better to have an elite pitcher than not? Sure, of course. Just like it's better to have an elite SS than not. But there is no correlation with that and winning World Series.
  4. TheLeviathan
    I think Myers' problem is that he hits like a CF but can't play the position. For all the huffing and puffing about trading such an elite talent for Shields back in the day, that move looks incredibly shrewd at this point. Hell, this one might for Tampa too in a few years.
  5. TheLeviathan
    Well since it's not true, I'm not sure why he has to get it. Aces do not win World Series. Flukey small sample size runs do - and those happen in all sorts of whacky ways.
  6. TheLeviathan
    Yeah, that can't miss blue-chip label has become quite tarnished. I wonder if there is an attitude issue or something behind the scenes that you don't get from scouting a guy but only from being around him up close and personal.
  7. TheLeviathan
    Not close.
  8. TheLeviathan
    That's a pretty good deal for KC.
  9. 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.
  10. TheLeviathan

    Cuba

    TheLeviathan replied to JB_Iowa's topic in Other Baseball

    I really only care how this may effect Tony O's delicious sandwich. It won't.....right?
  11. 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.
  12. 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.
  13. 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.
  14. 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.
  15. 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.
  16. TheLeviathan
    Heh, I think there was a thread not long ago about how often WAR is misused. This thread is wonderful evidence of that.
  17. 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.
  18. TheLeviathan
    That deal makes my brain hurt.
  19. 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.
  20. 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.
  21. 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?
  22. 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?
  23. 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.
  24. 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!
  25. 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.
×
×
  • Create New...