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
    Still, the lack of offensive production is a bit stunning at this point. Worrisome to say the least.
  2. TheLeviathan
    Right, so going back to what I said - we only know it "wasn't the right price" - we have no idea what prices were being offered. The problem with this thinking is that Willingham is only going to get less valuable in all likelihood. He might maintain his value, but it's quite unlikely. A rebuilding team with this many OF options shouldn't be concerned with moving an aging player like Willingham. It's a mistake to not be aggressive about shopping him. I fear we are far, far away from being aggressive about it. If it's so obvious we are rebuilding, why is the OF in the twilight of his career coming off a career year still on this team? That's the mistake being pointed out and you really don't have an answer for that short of "I trust Ryan". That's fine, but that's all it is. It's a valid point to see not moving him as a mistake.
  3. TheLeviathan
    Thanks....you do realize that quote isn't at all what you've portrayed it to be....right?
  4. TheLeviathan
    Never saw any such thing. I have trouble believing that quite frankly. I don't doubt Ryan's ability to gauge the value he is getting in return for a trade - I question how hard he was looking. I think he sees Willingham as a "core" guy that they aren't all that interested in moving.
  5. TheLeviathan
    I followed that pretty closely because I felt we were really missing out on an opportunity and I never heard any such thing. He was shopped, but all we know is that the Twins felt they didn't get good value. But I never read anything about what those offers were.
  6. TheLeviathan
    Source?
  7. TheLeviathan
    Nats are a great example. You know how they got Wilson Ramos? Too much to ask for us to start that process ourselves in FA with some of the excess money?
  8. TheLeviathan
    So if we lose 90 again this year with 80M payroll....does that excuse another drop of 20M or how does that reasoning work?
  9. TheLeviathan
    How exactly is it interesting or meaningful to discuss how to evaluate pitchers with the premise of "Ok, if we ignore all context and only focus in on one limited stat....which one would it be?" It's something akin to evaluating how great the internet is by working offline and looking at the google homepage. The conversation was about the Twins prizing durability over talent to such a degree that they overvalue it at the others expense. Citing IP as valuable lends credence to that faulty stance of the organization. We want durable pitchers who are good at pitching. One without the other is useless, trying to argue one of the other seems pointless or a bizarre defense of the organization on shaky ground.
  10. TheLeviathan
    I have the better part of a decade supporting my disbelief in this statement.
  11. TheLeviathan
    Did anyone else read that last sentence as setting the table to blame the almost certain reduction in gate revenues and fan support for why the team won't add players later in the season and beyond?
  12. TheLeviathan
    I hope he cleaned that with his napkin!
  13. TheLeviathan
    The whole thing is ridiculous. Let's back up. You said that IP is "by far" the "single most important stat" in, I presume, an attempt to help defend the idea that durability is most important. You have continued to defend it as the best stat to evaluate pitchers. What is the purpose of this exercise exactly? You've stripped it down to the idea that you can't look at the numbers that go into a stat's calculation, you can't distinguish qualified from unqualified, but you can make assumptions about what IP meant for performance. At some point...you do realize how silly this is right? I mean, what value does your initial point have if you have to go to these lengths to make it true?
  14. TheLeviathan
    Did people really forget what a mess Dozier was in the field last year? I'm not saying he can't be better, but there is a reason he was sent down. Frankly, he wasn't doing much of anything right.
  15. TheLeviathan
    Yeah, that was exactly my question the other day in the Diamond thread. The parallels to Mauer are significant. Why, only two months out from reporting, are you having surgery? Why isn't this being checked thoroughly nearly three months sooner at the end of the season? It's this sort of thing that really makes me question the competency of our training staff. (Not trying to start a flame war on them, but seriously....you didn't get this taken care of until almost 3 months had passed?) I get that injuries happen, but are late December surgeries common around the league? Sure doesn't seem like it.
  16. TheLeviathan
    My point still stands, even if my characterization of your position wasn't accurate. I get that you're not saying it's the only stat you'd use, just that if you had to pick one. But the point remains the same, if you are highlighting one stat as the best or first in importance, you are too stuck on one thing. Qualified ERA both includes people who have pitched only a significant amount of innings and allows you to rank their effectiveness to some degree. IP completely leaves performance to guess-work. I would argue the number of innings one pitches is only a positive if they weren't awful while they were out there. The Twins got 300 IP out of Liriano, Blackburn, and Duensing last year. I do not consider those "valuable" contributions because by and large, they were only filling space. Not contributing to the team's success. You said it yourself - runs and outs. Why you're choosing a stat that only counts one of those things is baffling to me when there are others that do both.
  17. TheLeviathan
    One stat: Qualified ERA leaders. You know you are only getting pitchers who pitched a significant portion of the season and you know at least generally how effective they were. It's not a sexy stat, but if you're stuck on this "one stat to rule them all" idea that seems to be the best compromise. Don't forget, this conversation started with drjim trying to give some credence to why the Twins promote durability over talent. I would suggest that the same problems in picking only one stat to evaluate on is precisely the same problem influencing the Twins ability to draft and develop good to great starting pitching: Too stuck on one thing.
  18. TheLeviathan
    You can still compound probability, 7 coins flipped one after the other all landing heads consecutively has the probability is .7%. Each independent event is 50/50 but you can still determine the probability of a series.
  19. TheLeviathan
    You know what good teams do? A little of both. I think the Twins have conditioned us in some very strange ways about how a team can be assembled. Even then, innings eaters still have to minimize the runs they give up or you won't want them out there eating innings since they aren't "keeping you in the game".
  20. TheLeviathan
    I was there at Target Field when they honored him after he passed. It was hard not to bite back the tears that day and it was evident throughout the stadium. Really powerful moment for a fanbase about a genuinely great human being.
  21. TheLeviathan
    I'll just leave this be, but this is pretty funny. This thread is like hypocrisy-palooza.
  22. TheLeviathan
    Sorry, too conspiracy-theory for me. I just don't think they've learned their lesson.
  23. TheLeviathan
    I don't think they're being deceptive about wanting high draft picks to draft high end pitching....because I don't think that's the plan. They are spinning, no doubt, but the rest of that isn't something I'd get behind. Not yet at least.
  24. TheLeviathan
    What you're saying makes some sense, but I'm just not sure our front office is that deceptive. They've been under this model for a long, long time independent of what was going on with revenues, talent, or anything else.
  25. TheLeviathan
    I don't think that's the argument. The problem with innings pitched is that they tell you nothing about how effective the pitcher was. You might be able to make some kind of reasonable guess about how effective they were, but it's still just a guess. Good evaluation of a pitcher needs to measure both their innings logged and their effectiveness. I think, in part, this is the Twins problem. They're more worried about health than talent. Bad players who are healthy are still bad players.
×
×
  • Create New...