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
    Any Ponder crack is a good one, but that one was especially well played cmat!
  2. TheLeviathan
    Didn't take long for this rule to look like it's going to cause some problems..... http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/mlb-big-league-stew/replay-home-plate-collision-rules-come-together-controversial-001931989--mlb.html Not a knee injury, but again shows how hard it is to avoid collisions when two players are focused on things other than where the other is.
  3. TheLeviathan
    I have a hard time relying on fielding percentage anymore. The way rulings happen around the league they might as well just do away with errors. The Twins shouldn't give up on Plouffe, his floor is a valuable lefty-mashing platoon option. His problem is that people focus on the two extremes he so frequently shows us. Some are hyper-focused on a 5 week binge that he'll never repeat in his life and some others focus too much on the horrible ruts he gets himself into. Truth lies in the middle. (All that said - the guy is a subpar fielder. But you can live with that when he gets slotted into the role that fits him better - bench)
  4. TheLeviathan
    The Twins say it virtually every time they send a prospect down: "We didn't want to keep him up here if he wasn't going to play every day." I think, in my lifetime as a Twins fan, I've heard that phrase close to a billion times. I do agree, however, with your take about Gardy's approach being a reality. That's the sticky part for me where I could teeter either way.
  5. TheLeviathan
    We'll certainly see. Hicks has looked so much better and Plouffe's opposite field hitting is a revelation that is shocking/encouraging too. (I'm not sure enough has been said about that. In two games I think he's gone opposite field more than all of last season. Didn't fact check that...but it feels right)
  6. TheLeviathan
    You said yourself it may just boil down to semantics, but in the over/under thread everyone is over on the win total, jokin posted pitching stats that everyone agreed with and were about as statistically bullish as can be reasonably held, Seth did the same with hitting projections, and I could go on. There have been multiple threads deriding "negativity." Sorry, but I find it a bit odd that people are feigning this idea of "well of course they're bad...everyone knew that!" From the tenor of many posts here it would've been hard to glean that opinion. Not that two games should confirm/affirm anything for anyone. We're a long way from that.
  7. TheLeviathan
    I think we're too well-trained by the Twins brass/mouthpieces into believing that "playing every day" is always superior to being on a big league roster. I don't think that's the issue here, Pinto can and should be learning just as much now as he could in AAA. The biggest issue with this 2/3 split right now (which I'm 100% behind for the beginning of the year) is Gardy's inexplicable stance about losing the DH and not pinch hitting him more often.
  8. TheLeviathan
    The bullish predictions have been about player performance - we have projections on this site of nearly 100% improvement from everyone on the roster between hitter projections, the starting pitching "having" to improve, etc. The only sobering take by any of the site's founders was largely met with criticism for being "too negative". So yes, I'm a bit shocked by this reaction that "we all knew they were bad". Other than Nick Nelson - you all could've had me fooled on that. (And here is probably where we have distinctions about what one considers a "bad" team, but improving 10 wins doesn't seem like a negative outlook to me. That's an odd spin on that) Either way, it's just two games. We're a few weeks/months away from knowing what this team is really about for certain.
  9. TheLeviathan
    I'm ok with the playing time share being 2/3 Suzuki. I'm just hoping it stays around that percentage early on and transitioning to a flip of that by the end of the year.
  10. TheLeviathan
    We all knew this was a pretty bad team? I must have missed that in all the bullish predictions and the multiple threads feigning shock at all the "negativity"...... (Still, it's been two days, gonna wait a bit to pass any profound judgments on the team just yet)
  11. TheLeviathan
    Yeah, I didn't mean to imply he wasn't already valuable, but I think pitching in higher leverage situations and translating his success there will further elevate him. I think he'll be able to do that as well. The boon is that it would open up some trade possibilities if any of Fien/Burton/etc. can put together a nice season.
  12. TheLeviathan
    We couldn't do that in, say, October?
  13. TheLeviathan
    Agreed, I'm eager to see what Swarzak can do in high leverage situations this year. He could really turn into a valuable piece for the team.
  14. TheLeviathan
    Ramos' durability may be hurting the Nats right now, but his injury while with the Twins was largely what cost us a shot at Cliff Lee and the subsequent Capps deal. So any ding his injuries are to the Nats now pale in comparison to how they hurt us.
  15. TheLeviathan
    Regardless of Ramos' career path...it was incredibly poor value at the time.
  16. TheLeviathan
    I took one look at the Dodger's price and I had a Jesse Pinkman moment...."JEEsus!"
  17. TheLeviathan
    Let me just say that I appreciate you fact-checking these things. The hardest thing about projecting is rationalizing what individual players will do within the context of the whole team's performance. In isolation all of these projections are very reasonable and attainable, the challenge is to keep them in context to see what they do collectively to see if you're in the right ballpark. I'd suggest this is a borderline unattainable total result for the team to achieve, which suggests a significant portion of these projections will not come true as nicely as this.
  18. TheLeviathan
    Especially with how heavily Gardy relies on matchup data. It was a head scratcher. I'd also ask...why not Bartlett? If he's supposed to be the veteran guy who knows how to hit in situations and who can play SS......why wasn't it him?
  19. TheLeviathan
    Hicks. I'm dying for a speed element on this team and would love if he could add to Buxton's infusion down the line.
  20. TheLeviathan
    Well Hicks looked good at the plate....yay!
  21. TheLeviathan
    Im not sure what it is about outlining the depth chart that equals "all of this is going to happen"....but that was never the point. Where last year it was Arcia, this year it's Hermann. Where last year it was Doumit/Pinto this year it's Fryer. And we could continue with the rest of the dreck you posted yourself. It's not that a bunch of injuries hurt...it's that ANY injuries calls for a Clete Thomas-like replacement. With a small margin of error that is a major concern.
  22. TheLeviathan
    Injuries to Hicks, Arcia, Willingham will all almost certainly result in extensive playing time for Hermann or Ramirez. (I want to say Parmelee, but I'm pretty sure he's behind Hermann) Plouffe pr Dozier would be Escobar. I won't even mention an injury or relapse to another important guy who I shall keep nameless in an effort not to jinx him.... All over this lineup an injury takes us from a bad/mediocre player to a downright awful player. I'd argue with this little margin for error that is significant.
  23. TheLeviathan
    One thing I'd caution as you balance that out: last year when there were injuries we called up Pinto, Arcia, and moved Doumit around. (Among some bad players too, no doubt) This year those players don't exist. When Willingham goes down we see Wilkin Ramirez or Hermann for 2-3 weeks or more. I've got Gibson and Hicks primed for huge improvements and I think Dozier stays steady. I think Arcia is going to have an adjustment period but by June he's going to be everything we hoped for. I even think that bullpen is largely going to be pretty darn good and have some trade value. The problem is injuries, Suzuki/Florimon/Plouffe/Bench/Kubel and how awful they might be, a lot of question marks in the starting staff, and little impact talent expected for at least most of the year. At the end of the day I don't let this drag me down, I still love the Twins - I'm just boarding up the windows for another rough one to ride out.
  24. TheLeviathan
    Except you repeatedly, and still are, assuming all those things have to happen. This team is a collision with the CF wall away from a huge problem. That's one issue only that could seriously damage the team. Just one. If even a few of them happen throughout the season it could be hideous, that was Nick's point. And most teams have "a few" things happen to them injury-wise in the course of a season. That's reality, not uncritical pessimism. As for the pollyanna thing, your argument belies the problem you have. You look at this as an "all or nothing" type of thing. My outlook says the Twins might be even worse this year, but, for example, I'm still predicting a much better Hicks and Gibson. (Among others as well) It's not Pollyanna to say that. What borders on Pollyanna is the refusal to acknowledge injuries. Or projecting the entire rotation to be better than career norms. Or expecting all the good from last year to maintain but none of the bad or all the bad to reverse and none of the good to reverse. Or all of the similar arguments tossed around lately.
  25. TheLeviathan
    The difference is that for some critical thinking is only valid as a tool of optimism. The idea that a less than desirable forecast could be fair analysis is unallowed. I understand why - we all love our team and WANT them to be better, but wanting something to be true and finding ways to justify that is not fair analysis. Nick just got done with a blog entry a few days ago that was critical and sober in its assessments of the roster and the depth behind it. The response by those wanting to trounce out "negativity" (note that there are no blog entries or even threads dedicated to calling out the "Pollyanna" perspective) gave it no credence as a valid thought. For whatever reason, for many fans, a forecast that isn't desirable is functionally incapable of being honest or truthful. Sometimes "things might be worse" is the reality. Spring can lead to hope, but that doesn't make it valid analysis. Afterall, as a wise man once said, hope is the dream of the waking man.
×
×
  • Create New...