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
    Seems to me the people really guilty of "silent evidence" were those that believed the Twins were going to remold their pitching staff in one off-season on the basis of a few pre-offseason interviews designed to keep season ticket holders around. The actual evidence is that Ryan doesn't like handing out big contracts to pitchers - never has, never will. (Which, again, I don't mind. I'm not a Ryan basher - I like him.) But the fact is those that took him at his word that he was going to add significant pitching have a right to hold him accountable to those words. All the spinning and deflecting being done from that is the problem.
  2. TheLeviathan
    Let's just agree that if you want to draft and develop a back...aim 4th and 5th round....not lumbering 2nd rounders.
  3. TheLeviathan
    .......
  4. TheLeviathan
    Agreed, even more reason to disregard any distinction about Ryan/Pohlads that tries to deflect away from Ryan's accountability.
  5. TheLeviathan
    What difference does the distinction about Ryan make? If your point is that Ryan would be a free agent spender for another club, it's irrelevant if he is the GM here. The point, either way, is that expecting that this team was going to go splash into free agency and fix a terrible rotation in one off-season was baseless for anything but wishful thinking regardles of whether you blame Ryan or the Pohlads. Either way it was highly unlikely to have expected that, which is what mike was getting at. We shouldn't be that shocked that our 2013 rotation is not significantly improved. It was the far more reasonable belief based on pretty much every available basis for making a prediction besides blind hope.
  6. TheLeviathan
    I think the team's priorities should be LB-DT-WR-CB in order for the draft. I think the o-line is just fine unless they lose Loadholt.
  7. TheLeviathan
    You're totally not figuring in his prospect ranking from 7 years ago. Duh.
  8. TheLeviathan
    He's been better than Pelfrey as a major league pitcher. Dude, you cited when Pelfrey was drafted and his former prospect ranking. If you compare big league numbers - Baker has been better. And in the AL no less. If you'd like to contend differently, use stats. Many of the things you cited seemed like serious reaches to make your point. You compared him to Baker yourself in your post, because it's a very relevant comparison on many levels. You just seemed to cherry pick the positives here in contrast to cherry picking the negatives previously. I simply acknowledge there is a mixed bag for both. I come down favoring Baker significantly more because he has been a better major league pitcher. For a one year deal that's a better gamble IMO. Pelfrey's biggest asset is durability, which would normally be a good thing if he was healthy. First year off a major injury neutralizes that for anyone. Putting "durability" as a positive in that mindset is pretty damn silly. Almost as silly as using draft position for a guy nearly 30 to cite potential.
  9. TheLeviathan
    Well said Ben. Just to add to your list, bi-polar is thrown around ignorantly a lot these days. Much of the discussions about mental illness are far more harmful than beneficial, IMO, in large part because of the rampant ignorance of specific mental illnesses. People only know vague generalities, including the media. That's a dangerous basis for a national dialogue about a sensitive subject.
  10. TheLeviathan
    Why would Duensing be involved....did we trade for Pelfrey?
  11. TheLeviathan
    All part of why I don't find any value in blasting this guy's name and story all over the media. We do more damage and we give this a-hole infamy. I don't understand how that is being defended in this thread.
  12. TheLeviathan
    Anything in the DSM is technically a mental illness. Aspergers, as part of the ASD spectrum, is also in that mix. But many reports are trying to refute laying this crime at the feet of that diagnosis. Either way, I worry that this will be the banner that flies from this crime: Worry about Autism. Scary thought if it is.
  13. TheLeviathan
    No, what you did was go positive on this signing in directly contradictory ways that you went negative on the Baker move. And you did some serious gymnastics to do it. I'm just calling you out on it, read your two blogs - they are basically Dr. Jekyl/Mr. Hyde on the same points. Baker has been a better pitcher in a tougher league, Pelfrey has been more durable. On a one year, "hope they rebound" deal - I'd personally defer to the better pitcher in that case. That doesn't change that your standards for "good deal/bad deal" totally flipped on their head. I don't mind Pelfrey, he's fine. But I was also fine with Baker for the very same reasons I'm fine with Pelfrey. You completely flipped on your own takes, I'm just calling you out on the consistency.
  14. TheLeviathan
    Apples to oranges. Comparing Ortiz to Pelfrey isn't fair. Let's compare Ortiz to Elarton.....which of those looks worse?
  15. TheLeviathan
    Again, no one is making that argument. Giving these murderers wall to wall coverage, I can assure you, is not de-motivating, it can only inspire. The issue is why do we give these murderers infamy at all - it flies in the face of common sense and decency.
  16. TheLeviathan
    I absolutely believe we should consider guns. I just don't find the politicized debates about them productive. Particularly in the wake of these tragedies that debate becomes heavy handed and lacking in all nuance.
  17. TheLeviathan
    Exactly - instead of video games or bullying I fear the national dialogue will be on autism. Given our track record on these conversations I am genuinely worried. Yet another reason to back off coverage on him.
  18. TheLeviathan
    Yeah Drabek would be a mighty nice target.
  19. TheLeviathan
    Exactly, I don't understand a number of the arguments being made here. 1) I thought Baker not having a team option in his deal was part of why it was a no-brainer not to sign him? This is totally brushed over when it was a central point in the Baker deal. Not to mention the fact that Pelfrey went in for TJ a full month later than Baker? If you read your response to this signing and Bakers you continue to have a lot of conflicting remarks. 2) Upside? Based on where he was drafted? C'mon...we're better than that right? Frightwig listed some damn fine statistics - Pelfrey's prospect listing 6 years ago and his draft position are not real sound places to hang your hat. He's not a bad pitcher, but that is pretty flimsy. For 1.5M more we would've gotten a clearly better pitcher who happened to do it against the AL, not the NL. 3) Durability? So apart from missing an entire season and likely not being ready until May of this one counts this in the positives? That's like saying my criminal record was fine except for that year I spent in jail for a bank robbery. Durability HAS to be a concern this first year, it's simply impossible to count that as a positive. If this were a two year deal I'd grant we might see it return in 2014...but in 2013? That is optimism with little to no basis for a guy that won't even be a year removed from major elbow surgery two months into the season.
  20. TheLeviathan
    If the claim was that it would then you have a point, but that has never been claimed. The reason they don't is only partly to discourage repeat offenders. The larger reason is so that they don't give some jackass the 5 seconds of fame he's trying to earn by being an *******. In other words - to not dignify being a jerk. Which is precisely the point. We do, intended or not, dignify the act. Columbine is the ultimate example - it spawns copycats, it has made those two murderers into cultural icons (negative icons, but icons nonetheless), and there was ZERO substantive, practical results out of the process that dignified them. I call that stupid and unethical.
  21. TheLeviathan
    Who said anything about censorship? I would suggest it isn't ethical to direct most of the attention on the killers. I have never said the general public isn't fascinated with these things, but the media dictates their degree of coverage and ultimately makes the decision about just how much glorification these murderers get. Those decisions come into play before my thumb can ever flip the channel. Making excuses for their poor ethics is just that - excuses. I understand what the world is, I disagree that it ought to be that way. It isn't a hard distinction. And my disagreement stems from the fact that A) some (not all) past killers have felt motivated by prior mass murders. Perhaps "inspired" is the best way to say it. Our wall to wall coverage of "why this person did it" never amounts to much of any substantive progress. So not only do we make these vile human beings famous, we don't even garner anything practical out of the process. I gladly sign-up to decry that.
  22. TheLeviathan
    First - you are consistently falling into the is-ought fallacy. Second - answer my question and then I will answer yours. Fact is that we hold businesses accountable on any number of moral grounds in our legal system. You have no meaningful point you have articulated yet. This is pretty much the last time I'll bother with your web of fallacies and empty rhetoric. Asking businesses to act ethically at their own loss his hardly radical.
  23. TheLeviathan
    Does operating a business make you immune from ethics? That appears to be your point.
  24. TheLeviathan
    Good think you're not stepping too far out on a limb and comparing school shootings to cheeseburgers, you know you have a strong point when you walk down that analogy. No one is denying consumer responsibility. But our law books are filled with orders for businesses to act responsibly and not harm the general public. Anywhere from usury to FDA regulations. It's not so simple as you seem to want to make it out to be. Also, the media is made of of individuals as well - I'm just demanding that they have the "self-control required to avoid these things." So I fail to see where you have anywhere to stand.
  25. TheLeviathan
    Would have to defer to someone who has seen all the greats, but he's better than Barry and Smith who are the two I have seen in my life time. His combination of explosion and power is ridiculous.
×
×
  • Create New...