Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

TheLeviathan

Old-Timey Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    21,580

  • 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
    Picking arbitrary dates in the middle of contracts for when they do and don't matter is meaningless. The contract is signed with two factors: the agreement by both parties that the player has produced up to X value and that the player will continue to produce close enough to X value to warrant the signing. If they didn't consider past and future production, no party would be interested in the signing. And your entire point is a distinction without a difference. If you are going to claim "hey look - they have trade value" because the team will includes tens of millions of dollars you haven't changed the equation at all. These guys have less trade value precisely because you HAVE to include that kind of money to make them movable. You haven't discovered some "get out of bad value free" card here - it's still a crapload of money other players with other contracts don't need to have attached to be moved.
  2. TheLeviathan
    To me, most of the arguments do boil down to the list above. Again, I'd like to hear these logical arguments. I don't think Gardy is a bad manager - he's just had a bad run recently and it's time for things to change. He's gotten far more leash than basically anyone in baseball in as long as I can remember.
  3. TheLeviathan
    Please elaborate them...because some of them were mentioned already in a 15 reply thread.
  4. TheLeviathan
    Right, so it's based on both.
  5. TheLeviathan
    Antony most definitely humiliated some people publicly. Those conversations should happen in private, never a public accosting of a player by the GM. I'm glad Jim Pohlad chose not to do it. Too many GMs do this around the league and it's dumb. That includes the Twins when they do it.
  6. TheLeviathan
    The issue nick is talking about, IMO, is more that minor league defensive abilities are WAY over-analyzed. For me, the best explanation is that scouts aren't watching on a daily basis which is the only really good way to get a feel for a guy's abilities. You can't pull up the player's numbers like you can with BB rates, OPS, strikeouts, etc. Defensive stats aren't even available to the same degree much less the fact that when they are they are flakey at best. I don't put much of any stock into a minor league player's defensive profile. Hell, Delmon Young was, at one point, supposed to be a future gold glover. Delmon Young!
  7. TheLeviathan
    Contract terms are based on past performance but also the team's belief that future production will match it, at least for some length of time. So it's both, give or take depending on the player. I'm not sure why this is even an argument.
  8. TheLeviathan
    This whole thing represents some serious incompetence - at least in these negotiations. Wow.
  9. TheLeviathan
    Will be good to see Santana back.
  10. TheLeviathan
    Airing dirty laundry in public, especially about young players, has zero gain. It literally does nothing to help what really matters. Just like in any other area of management, those things are not handled well through public shaming.
  11. TheLeviathan
    Is that why we have the same leadership for the last 20 years? Indifference? Not a ringing endorsement of Ryan and Gardy then. Plus I'm not sure bashing the owners personally here is constructive for any sort of dialogue.
  12. TheLeviathan
    IF Morales could be signed to that deal I'd probably be open to it, but my biggest concern is easily the fact that the guy looks like he's 41 out there. He makes Willingham look like a spry chicken. That gives me a lot of pause - the rest I'm 100% with you.
  13. TheLeviathan
    I would suggest that neither role warrants public humiliation of young players.
  14. TheLeviathan
    It's more about what Molitor has done well and why he's a good fit. But let's also not excuse some of Gardy's flaws (he has strenghts too) - the truth is, though, whether Gardy relates well or not I don't know - but any public problems or issues are always with young players. They always go under the bus. Hell, other than Nolasco I can't ever remember it happening before with a veteran. There are negatives about what Gardy does and his handling with young players is on there.
  15. TheLeviathan
    Wouldn't that be precisely the right time? Let someone with a better rapport with those players take over to lead into the next wave of Twins' success.
  16. TheLeviathan
    One key difference is Antony called out specific players, Pohlad was taking generally about the team. I think that distinction is pretty important.
  17. TheLeviathan
    Today Phil Miller has a thought provoking piece in which he quotes Jim Pohlad on the state of the team. Here are a few of the interesting nuggets: On prospects: On how close they are: On the winning road trip relative to their overall success: What are your reactions to these comments? Is Jim Pohlad just worn out from three years of losing and the cynicism shown through or is this just the kind of straight-forward, realistic talk many of us would like to see more of?
  18. TheLeviathan
    Souhan asked some questions we've seen around here quite often today. We've hashed many of these arguments and the piece lays most of them out very well, my question is - do you predict any of the positions possibly up for changing will see that change? Notably GM and the management staff - where do you stand on what you expect to happen next season? And is Molitor the clear "next in line" manager?
  19. TheLeviathan
    I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest your argument fell apart at the "Compare Suzuki to Dozier and Perkins" portion. Suzuki has been a wonderful addition and a credit to the FO, even if he was their third choice. But Suzuki is playing way above his head. I'd still take him back just because our catching options are slim, but let's not pretend we're talking about moving a perennial all-star here either. Yeesh.
  20. TheLeviathan
    So you're saying it's time to get my affairs in order and make right with the world?
  21. TheLeviathan
    Great picks. As good as Suzuki has been, the impact Dozier has on the offense is crazy. When he goes cold, the whole team can't score runs. When he gets hot, they put them up in bunches.
  22. TheLeviathan
    Suzuki is the one expiring veteran I'm ok with them retaining. But given the catcher need out there...I sure hope we explore trading aggressively as well.
  23. TheLeviathan
    I hope you're right. I was a big fan of his signing, but he's looked completely awful so far.
  24. TheLeviathan
    Shall I point out his 2014 numbers? Morales is about as far away from his 2013 numbers as he is close to Florimon's. He's been that bad.
  25. TheLeviathan
    In my eyes - Sano, Buxton, Rosario, Berrios, and Polanco are unlikely to see significant time until 2016. Making 2017 a more realistic timetable. But boy do I hope I'm wrong and it goes more the way you suggest! Either way - Morales and his dumpy hitting and athleticism that looks more like he's 41 than 31 just don't interest me.
×
×
  • Create New...