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
    You keep shifting the argument. You said roster age is "meaningless". It's not meaningless - it's generally an indicator of how well your drafting and development is going and if those kids are making your team. If you want to say they're still old because their young players are bad, well that's still an indictment. I'd argue they have deliberately put old players on this team for appearances - but they couldn't even bring in old players that are all that good. Also an indictment. And here's the most meaningful part - when this team turns the corner (and it will eventually, be it 2 years or 12) - the roster age WILL drop with the infusion of the young wave that carries the team forward. That's when we'll know. Right now that old roster age indicates we have a long way to go yet.
  2. TheLeviathan
    I'd like Molitor because he seems to embrace newer ideas in how to manage - like using shifts as an example. I also believe he'd open up more running on this team. Under Gardenhire - even when we've had speed - we've played like a station to station team. I would imagine many others have valid reasons for liking him separate of their dislike for Gardy's continued employment.
  3. TheLeviathan
    He has pitched very well lately. Unfortunately, other GMs know that it has only been "lately". It reminds me a lot of the time period before Liriano was dealt - we like to think the short term success has an impact on value but pro GMs aren't easy to fool.
  4. TheLeviathan
    I don't think anyone is advocating "building" through free agency. It is nice, however, to "add" through free agency. Like all decisions there is a risk of the move failing, nothing more and nothing less.
  5. TheLeviathan
    Many of the over 30 guys haven't either. What is meaningful about the age of the roster is that it gives an indication of how many players on the roster are part of the future which can give an idea of how close the future might be. Not always, but it's meaningful. Many young guys have not contributed. The roster average age of 30, boosted by a bunch of old guys not part of the future, has done nothing but lose 90 games for several seasons and likely another. Why be old and not very good if you're looking to the future? That's not meaningless.
  6. TheLeviathan
    Too true. I've been to many parks in many places and we are uniquely awful at this.
  7. TheLeviathan
    There is an attendant to check IDs and watch for people getting too drunk. It's an interesting idea...but that area of Target Field is the nexus of awful crowd movement. Minnesotans are particularly awful about the "I'm in the middle of the concourse, so this seems like a good place to stop and do something meaningless and annoying" approach to walking and that area bottlenecks as bad as any at the field.
  8. TheLeviathan
    In 2007 he was the Giant's 4th best prospect on some BA lists. Was he a top 100 player? No, but still on a different stratosphere of upside than, say, Correia. I was wrong about Diamond's ranking, confused him with a Texas prospect. Even still, he had more upside than Correia. I could bring up Brandon Moss, Chris Davis, Jake Arrieta, etc. Guys like this are always around to take a gamble on - the success stories are few and far between, but I'd much rather gamble there then on Correia, Kubel, Bartlett, Pelfrey, etc.
  9. TheLeviathan
    They've been fine this year. Not devastated by MLB injuries and still aren't going to finish anywhere near .500 despite preseason proclamations to the contrary.
  10. TheLeviathan
    You're wrong. Both of those guys were formally high-touted prospects that flopped as they approached the big leagues. Those kinds of guys have FAR more upside than, say, Bartlett. Or Correia.
  11. TheLeviathan
    I didn't fact check the players, just picked a younger player from those days. 1999 was a change for the better - Dougie M, Guzman, etc. No more old crap...roll with some youth and hope.
  12. TheLeviathan
    I'm with Nicksaviking, if he fails.....ok. It stinks, but it does happen. Just don't stop wading aggressively into FA. This move was far more important for that reason than the actual results. (Which is sad, results should matter, but with this club just the effort was a welcome change)
  13. TheLeviathan
    If something like this (a 1-2 month turnaround for a pitcher from garbage to productive simply by a coaching change) isn't enough to rattle your confidence in Anderson.......then you might as well just endorse he stay here for life.
  14. TheLeviathan
    Scott Diamond was a smart move by the club. Jason Kubel was not. Nor was Bartlett. They aren't targeting enough upside. And they haven't been with the major league roster for awhile.
  15. TheLeviathan
    Don't even look at 2B in the NL then. There are 5-6 guys better than all three that made it from that league.
  16. TheLeviathan
    The Twins philosophy on this has always been backwards. They equate "not injured often" with "eats innings", when it's far more likely guys that are good at pitching will eat innings. Durability helps, but it doesn't mean much when you're not good enough to last in games.
  17. TheLeviathan
    I tried, HARD, a a kid to care about those mid-90s teams. But no, my spark for baseball didn't renew until 99. I was thrilled to be done with the days of Otis Nixon and welcomed Rich Becker. For good or bad, it was fun to see potential and not a bunch of guys on the downhill of their career. Ryan hasn't handed out bloated deals, he's handed out dumb ones to old players or guys with minimal upside. That's why our average roster age is getting older, not younger despite being three years into a rebuild.
  18. TheLeviathan
    I actually like Ryan and respect a lot of what he's done. Smith deserves significant credit for the state of this farm and so does Ryan for carrying on what has built up. The draft failures towards the end of his first tenure are precisely why we're here, but maintaining success for more than a decade is extremely difficult. The problem, is that Ryan permeates the "old boys club". He's an old scout and he's stuck in old ways. I think, if I was the owner, I'd have no choice but to fire him. Not because of a lack of competence, but because of a desperate need within the organization to be open to new ideas, new faces, and more accountability. If, by some miracle, Ryan changed that mentality and was willing to shed the "old boys club" - I'd keep him. I just don't believe he can or will.
  19. TheLeviathan
    Nate Schierholtz was a minor league deal the Cubs turned into 21 HRs and a 108 OPS+ last year. That's the difference. Has Schierholtz been awful this year? Sure has, but they take flyers on guys like him and Arrieta and not friggin Pelfrey and Kubel. I want them to invest, no matter how long the odds, in high ceilings. Hughes was the only example of that and I strongly and proudly applauded that move beforehand and afterward.
  20. TheLeviathan
    I really don't care if anyone is being blocked or not. I care that they're handing out multi-year deals to players with minimal chance of having trade value and no chance of being anything other than placeholders. If they are just place holders....why not just gamble with someone else that's under the age of 30? Those guys exist (and largely fail, but the point is about approach moreso than results) every year to gamble on. I applaud them signing Nolasco, for the symbolism most of all. Pelfrey? Good god that was stupid from the outset and has proven to be even more ridiculous with time. The team has to get away from feeling the need to appear to be contending. I'd rather have them take risks (like with Nolasco) and fail then see them play it ridiculously safe (see Kubel and Bartlett) and fail. This team has actually managed to get OLDER not younger the last three years. We see some great things happening in the minors. That doesn't excuse bungling opportunities with the big league club.
  21. TheLeviathan
    Kluber has been great, but I think I'd still vote Sale. The guy is just ridiculous and his stats are a bit better. (Just not as much because of the injury)
  22. TheLeviathan
    If I'm going to watch bad baseball and try to hope for the future....it's sure as hell a lot easier to convince myself it'll get better when the guys aren't 35-40. Especially if they have zero trade value potential.
  23. TheLeviathan
    It is exceptionally rare to see Gardy call out a veteran. Wow...and he's dead on.
  24. TheLeviathan
    Absolutely, but the goal of a GM should be to reduce the number of marginal players. So not sure what you're defending here - we don't want those players. Nor should we want guys nearing 40 who aren't helping you win.
  25. TheLeviathan
    Honestly I think all of these things would translate just as well on video as they do in person. I think the idea you need to have someone there is just an antiquated, feel-good notion.
×
×
  • Create New...