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
    Wait....did your list include the husk of Kerry Wood and Geovanny Soto? Yeesh. Ignoring that - Epstein traded for Rizzo and, going even further. Would you trade Sano for all 7 of these players? Because I might not. I certainly wouldn't deal Mauer for them. Ryan had much more to work with. That's not a shot against him, more a shot at how god awful the Cubs were ran for a long time. Then I'm failing to see the point. None of the players you listed represented a significant risk or a premier player. He's had many in his tenure and has never dealt one. You could argue timing, but we get into this with Ryan a lot: people say "Ryan's just never done that because A, B, C, etc". Well, yeah. He's never done it - so can we stop assuming he will? He's had a helluva long tenure to establish trends. More than most GMs get. Again I ask you to consider - does he avoid risks because he knows they'll fail or because he doesn't know the right ones to take?
  2. TheLeviathan
    It absolutely was. Without the loosened credit requirements of the early to mid 90s, these private banks could not have legally done this. Ultimately the chief abusers were in the private sectors (much like college universities are), but their abuses were only possible because of changes to regulation meant to give everyone the American dream of owning a home. Part of good policy is anticipating and stemming the tide of abuse.
  3. TheLeviathan
    Epstein and Ryan aren't comparable. Ryan is taking back over a mess he has a large hand in creating. Epstein was taking over for a previous regime that made awful decisions. Epstein also had virtually nothing to build around whereas Ryan had Mauer, Sano, Kepler, Rosario, and others already on his team when he started a second time. We'll see if Epstein can build the Cubs back up from the husk that he inherited. But Ryan had a much more favorable position coming in, the comparisons aren't fair you're using. As for Ryan himself, it is a problem that Ryan is afraid to make big trades like the ones you mention. He's resistant to dealing premier talent and resistant to dealing for it. I'd argue that one of the reasons he doesn't make a lot of mistakes is he doesn't take any risks. The question you have to ask is - if other GMs can take risks and avoid major mistakes - does Ryan not do it because he's not as competent as those GMs at avoiding mistakes? Ryan gets a lot of credit for not making back-breaking decisions, but one could argue he only avoids those because he's little more than an average GM whose aware of it and avoids exposing it. In my opinion, it's ok to expect successful risk-taking from a "good" GM. We should demand that of Ryan as well.
  4. TheLeviathan
    Ryan has been saying this stuff for so long he has effectively mislead many, many people about FA. Yes, you don't build through FA, but it is one of only few viable means of improving your team. It isn't some vile thing only the desperate and incompetent dabble in. It can be a very effective way to make huge strides. Let's hope we start seeing I.
  5. TheLeviathan
    Hart is an interesting fit, I just worry the guy is physically shot.
  6. TheLeviathan
    Smith isn't Ryan. One could argue it's precisely this issue tht cost him his job.
  7. TheLeviathan
    Pits a trend that goes a ways back and is supported by public comments about not liking long contracts. At some point the mentality has to change as a way to improve and retain talent. You have hope that it will, I have skepticism because it never has. Time will tell.
  8. TheLeviathan
    Those concerns have been gone for awhile now. How much longer does that excuse get to work? As I said...it has to change.
  9. TheLeviathan
    those are the easier deals because you have leverage advantage. This is simply a fact, but Ryan has never given more than 3 years to a FA or even an impending one. That trend has to stop.
  10. TheLeviathan
    This beautiful dream is hard to wake up from to the bitter reality of this team.
  11. TheLeviathan
    I don't like all this moral sledge-hammering. Too many god awful, crippling policies have been built on that premise. We should care that we are doing the right thing but we should care even more that we do it the right way. Not just do something or anything regardless of consequences so we can feel good about ourselves. just look at student loans, the housing crash, and even the medical system - all examples of pious good intentions that caused enormous harm.
  12. TheLeviathan
    Right, that was a good deal, but it wasn't a prospect he moved there. It was a young MLB player.
  13. TheLeviathan
    What good results has he had? (I mean that honestly, I'm having trouble remembering a prospect being dealt. Castillo maybe?) And what insignificant prospects do you expect to get value for?
  14. TheLeviathan
    You know we go way back and I respect you Brock, but this line is becoming increasingly unclear. A lot less than that has been grounds for private messages. As to this issue, I'm not so sure what the angst is about. Ryan has no track record of dealing significant prospects at all. So there is no past success or failure that anyone should be worried about because, if history has taught us anything, this is a problem we won't have to worry about.
  15. TheLeviathan
    I like more of what I've seen from him than Ponder. But I'd prefer they move on with their pick next year.
  16. TheLeviathan
    To be fair, both parties have played a significant role in getting to this point. But the Republicans around about 95% to blame for this particular situation.
  17. TheLeviathan
    Also Glunn, you should note the phrasing of your link: "tax" revenues. The fees and issues I'm talking about aren't technically taxes. TheDems worked very hard to muddy those waters to sell this. So I'm sure there is a sizable chunk of the official taxes coming from the rich, it's the other penalties no one wants to call taxes that concerns me.
  18. TheLeviathan
    A couple things - first, automation has been a threat since the first factory was built. The issue isn't going to be the number of jobs but the reduced hours, pay, and security of full time positions. Its going to force people to work much harder to earn the same pay at (most likely) a time in their life they need health care the least. Secondly, inflation isn't going to change the loan problem. The loan problem was caused by the implementation of the program itself and the ludicrous notion of having virtually no accountability for colleges in keeping rates down. The program is nothing more than a slush fund for universities that has actually made the affordability of college LESS than what it was. I personally believe that impact has been a huge factor on a number of industries that are used to having more spending power available to 22-35 year olds.
  19. TheLeviathan
    Good post Shane and sympathies on the infraction, I thought it was clearly tongue in cheek.
  20. TheLeviathan
    Less talk, more do. Then I'll buy into this.
  21. TheLeviathan
    That's good, the question is - how much is this going to impact people 25-35 who are least likely to need health insurance, already strapped with much higher student loans than previous generations, and are likely not yet on a true career path but trying to make ends meet? Or the people working 2 or 3 jobs, one of which for benefits? This law is largely funded off of their backs, I have serious reservations about how that's going to play out economically. Ben's example above works fairly well for that.
  22. TheLeviathan
    Depends what happens. The current laws suck, no doubt. But does a change to them tht further cripples the economy really provide a net gain? One were full time work and benefits are cast aside? I don't think it's an easy answer.
  23. TheLeviathan
    Almost as awesome as the name.
  24. TheLeviathan
    never said it did, just said this could have some really awful long term effects as well. Whether the net gain is a positive I have my doubts.
  25. TheLeviathan
    Year of the strikeout? My baseball viewing this year was very misleading then.....
×
×
  • Create New...