Jump to content
  • Create Account

Mark G

Verified Member
  • Posts

    93
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    Mark G got a reaction from Sconnie in Did the Twins Fleece Tampa Twice?   
    A pitcher whose sinker and changeup breaks down makes hitters swing and miss even at slower speeds.  A pitcher whose fastball rises as it comes into the zone may make a hitter miss in the same fashion, even at modest speeds for a fastball.  He will, though, need another pitch or two that makes hitters nervous so they can't sit on the fastball (which would make it even sneakier fast).  In my day, that is what they paid pitching coaches for.  We are supposed to have a good one; time for him to earn his money.  
  2. Like
    Mark G reacted to bean5302 in No, Top FA Starters Are Not Risky   
    I was pretty sure of the outcome before I wrote the article because I'd done some research before Darvish slipped through our hands years ago, but I was surprised just how bad some of the "good" signings we made really were. Also, the article is more for TD folks than me: I was writing while procrastinating on a engine project in the garage, haha. The big issue is being pretty sure you're right without having the research to back it up for other folks to review.
  3. Like
    Mark G got a reaction from ToddlerHarmon in No, Top FA Starters Are Not Risky   
    I agree with everything you laid out in the above article, and what you just posted here.  And I could have saved you the hours on the internet, too.  Almost anyone in my generation of baseball junkies could have told you exactly this without a single stat or WAR, just our eyes and paying attention to the box scores every day.  
    Don't take that as some kind of insult, I say it somewhat tongue in cheek knowing that folks today rely on the analytics.  I only point out that sometimes it is overrated (highly overrated?) compared to just old time seeing for yourself.  But you are spot on, however you came to the conclusions you did.    
  4. Like
    Mark G got a reaction from ashbury in Did the Twins Fleece Tampa Twice?   
    A pitcher whose sinker and changeup breaks down makes hitters swing and miss even at slower speeds.  A pitcher whose fastball rises as it comes into the zone may make a hitter miss in the same fashion, even at modest speeds for a fastball.  He will, though, need another pitch or two that makes hitters nervous so they can't sit on the fastball (which would make it even sneakier fast).  In my day, that is what they paid pitching coaches for.  We are supposed to have a good one; time for him to earn his money.  
  5. Like
    Mark G got a reaction from Ted Schwerzler in Did the Twins Fleece Tampa Twice?   
    A pitcher whose sinker and changeup breaks down makes hitters swing and miss even at slower speeds.  A pitcher whose fastball rises as it comes into the zone may make a hitter miss in the same fashion, even at modest speeds for a fastball.  He will, though, need another pitch or two that makes hitters nervous so they can't sit on the fastball (which would make it even sneakier fast).  In my day, that is what they paid pitching coaches for.  We are supposed to have a good one; time for him to earn his money.  
  6. Like
    Mark G reacted to tony&rodney in No, Top FA Starters Are Not Risky   
    Excellent work and a fine piece of writing to support an offseason where the Twins absolutely need to make the best bids for a couple of starting pitchers. On other posts there are questions about how anyone can project for pitchers like Alcantara, Ray, Rodon, and others but the more important point is made in this post - the best players are worth their money. I was a fan of trading Dozier two years before he left because the Twins really needed help and there were few options other than trades. Right now, the Twins have multiple players at the same positions and money to spend on free agents; there are really good options this offseason and the sooner the Twins act the better.
  7. Like
    Mark G reacted to mike8791 in No, Top FA Starters Are Not Risky   
    Bean, thanks for the data that supports those of us who feel FA is only a fool's game for teams like the Twins emphasizing bargains rather than quality.  The big question is whether this losing operating philosophy stems from Pohlad's tight-fistedness or incompetence of the FO.  
    My guess is this past futility reflects more on ownership.  Pohlad's banking background seems to inhibit him from foregoing short term profits instead of investing in long term success.  Of course, I cannot possibly know what JP is thinking, but the results speak for themselves.  He hires guys like Ryan and Falvey who share his bargain basement outlook on spending.  Ryan(at least in his first go-round) proved adept at some shrewd trades and had some drafting success.  Likewise, Falvey has acquired some good pitching vis the trade route(drafting success TBD).  
     
    Basically, the problem is Pohlad's leadership in not enunciating an operating philosophy that would allow for the team to be legitimate contenders for a World Championship.  No, Ryan and Falvey don't get free passes here, either.  Their unwillingness to make some significant mid-season trades that might have elevated an already competitive club into a legitimate WS contender has been a glaring weakness for 20 years.  Me thinks we have a two-headed monster : a passive owner who looks at the P&L statement as the end-all to his stewardship and risk-averse GM's who are selected because of basic agreement with this "don't-rock-the-boat" approach.  The results speak for themselves, not just this year, but for the last 18 years of zero playoff success.
  8. Like
    Mark G reacted to TopGunn#22 in No, Top FA Starters Are Not Risky   
    You make a great point.  The Twins have always spent for "QUANTITY" not "QUALITY."  It's like Slick Rick of the Vikings always trading back to accumulate more and more 6th and 7th rounders instead of just drafting Tyler Johnson (#3 WR spot SOLVED) when he was sitting there.
    I   GUARANTEE  the Twins, if they spend the money on bringing Max Scherzer here,  he will be worth every penny !!  Now I get that Max would be crazy not to just stick with the Dodgers who will pay him more and give him a better chance for a World Series ring, but that's not my point.  The point is, when you spend on QUALITY you lessen the risk.  The wins and innings that kind of SP/RP give you add up to tremendous value for what you spent.  Honestly, I don't know why this FO doesn't understand that.  I thought they were brought here to replace the antiquated thinking of the Terry Ryan regime.  Maybe this is a Pohlad "thing."  It's hard to understand how the Twins have never figured this out.
  9. Like
    Mark G reacted to LastOnePicked in Did the Twins Fleece Tampa Twice?   
    They HAD to trade Cruz. I'm rough on this FO, but the trade seems fair and even promising. In fact, it's looking a lot better than the Berrios trade.
    These things will take a lot longer to evaluate fairly, though. And I really hope Cruz helps Tampa to a World Series championship. I respect they way they build a winning team year after year based on player development with limited payroll.
  10. Like
    Mark G reacted to Dman in Did the Twins Fleece Tampa Twice?   
    The Odo trade needs some context.  As per usual the ever payroll conscious Rays needed to move Odo and his market wasn't good.  I think we all were surprised the Twins were getting two years of Odo for a single player in A ball.  Still Palacios had potential and he is showing now what the Rays thought they were getting.  A player with a good eye at the plate who also is hitting for power that can play short.  It didn't work out for Tampa but it had decent potential IMO.  Tampa achieved what they wanted though which was getting rid of salary so in my mind they weren't really trying to "win" that trade just achieve an objective.  So it depends on how you look at these deals IMO.
    Way too early to assess the Cruz trade and again context is needed.  Tampa wasn't worried about winning the Cruz trade long term as they needed a difference maker bat for this postseason and Cruz was the best available that wouldn't hurt them salary wise long term.  Strotman was a player likely not good enough to make their 40 man next year and Ryan looks good but is a one trick pony unless his secondary's improve.  It is quite the haul for half a year of Cruz but again Tampa needed a short term asset to help them in the playoffs and they got the guy they wanted.  If he helps them win the world series then in my mind Tampa wins this trade or you could say both teams won depending on how Ryan and Strotman work out.  If Cruz fails to be the difference maker they paid for then it seems hard to see how they could "win" that trade but sometimes you have to take calculated risks and I think theirs was a good one.
  11. Like
    Mark G reacted to LanceJS in Did the Twins Fleece Tampa Twice?   
    Sorry, but even if Ryan turns out to be at least a serviceable starter (or better) AND if the Rays win the championship, no, the Twins didn't "fleece" the Rays.  Not only is it too early to tell if Ryan will be good, it is also to early to determine if the price TB paid for Cruz was worth it, as they are going for it all this year.   And I ask the same question here that I ask with every trade - why does every trade have to end with a "loser" and a "winner" like the games?  What's wrong if both teams get what they wanted from a trade? 
  12. Like
    Mark G got a reaction from RpR in Assessing the Twins Trade Deadline   
    Two things that stuck out in the article that made me pause; one always makes me pause, the other is relatively new.  One, losing proven major league talent for guys who have never seen a major league dugout has always been a problem, not only for the Twins, but for half of MLB.  I said this before and I will say it until the cows come home: competitive balance always changes in August, and not for the better.  The best players changing hands changes which teams are playoff caliber.  And getting nothing but hope in return, no matter how great the hope is, doesn't change that.  Which just happens to segue into number two: "there's no reason for this team to hold onto any semblance of respectability" makes a mockery of the competitive balance of MLB if teams go down this road.  This is not a tryout camp, it is competitive major league baseball and all 30 teams owe the game, if not the fans, a competitive game to test playoff caliber teams.  When one or more fold up tent and begin spring training early, it embarrasses the game itself.  Plan for the future, but put your team on the field.  That is my sermon for the day. 
  13. Like
    Mark G reacted to Richard Swerdlick in Assessing the Twins Trade Deadline   
    I may be one of the few who like Simmons for a team that wants to be respectable. He will probably win a gold glove again this year. Although his batting numbers are not good he has had many timely hits. Unless we have a major league caliber defender at shortstop for next year, I would bring him back if the price is right.
  14. Like
    Mark G got a reaction from twinssporto in As Buxton Hope Fades, Front Office Goes   
    Pretty good assessment after the first paragraph.  As for the first paragraph.......hmm, how to be polite.    As good as Buxton is, yes, when healthy, he is not on the same planet as Rod Carew if you want to go into Twins history.  Not only did Rod have the tools, he used them.  He could turn a walk into a run better than anyone in the game.  Buxton refuses to use his speed to the degree he not only could, but should, anywhere but in the field.  He will not bunt, and steals sparingly (as in he could steal 3rd and even home far more often).  In his own words, he is "looking to drive the ball", not worry about his average, even though a higher average would put him on base more, putting him in a position to do more with his speed.  His athleticism may or may not be unmatched, but his production is far from unparalleled (no, production is not on a per game basis, it is season to season).  You have to be on the field to produce; no one has yet to produce from the trainers room.  
    Don't get me wrong; as I said, a good assessment from the 2nd paragraph down, but he has started more than 88 games only once in his career and until he does consistently, year in and year out, the jury will remain out.  Doesn't mean I wouldn't sign him, but not for the money he thinks he is worth.  Not yet, anyway.
  15. Like
    Mark G reacted to Reptevia in As Buxton Hope Fades, Front Office Goes   
    Buxton is a career .247 hitter. He has only reached 50 RBI’s ONCE. He has only reached 20 stolen bases ONCE. He has only played 80 games ONCE. He is a LOT closer to Billy Hamilton than Mookie Betts. Despite this, he (and a lot of people on forums) seem to think he’s worth $30-35M per. I just can’t see a 1/4 of the payroll sitting on the bench for over half the year. 
  16. Like
    Mark G reacted to LastOnePicked in As Buxton Hope Fades, Front Office Goes   
    This is the part of the article that I don't understand: "Derek Falvey and Thad Levine have put in an infrastructure of sustainability and competitiveness."
    How so? They had a great 2019, an okay 2020, and are now again a bottom-5 team in all of MLB. I've watched this team for a long time, and I wouldn't describe them as remotely "competitive."
    It's disappointing. I wanted them to do these things, but they haven't. Not yet, at least, and patience is wearing thin.
  17. Like
    Mark G reacted to jkcarew in As Buxton Hope Fades, Front Office Goes   
    …his production is unparalleled…
    career .298 OBP and 96 wRC+.  I mean, come on.
    He’s a talented player that has recently shown signs IN EXTREMELY SMALL SAMPLES that he could be a very valuable player. But even then, only if he reverses a long term trend of injury and sporadic play. I want him, but I’m not breaking the bank for him.
  18. Like
    Mark G reacted to dex8425 in As Buxton Hope Fades, Front Office Goes   
    Yep. I'd be willing to bet Donaldson ends up with more career WAR than Buxton. 
  19. Like
    Mark G reacted to Major League Ready in As Buxton Hope Fades, Front Office Goes   
    Hard to argue his "athleticism is unmatched",  The part that "his production is unparalleled" even with the caveat "when healthy" is true for a 27 game stretch.  I too hope for more of that production but he should not be mentioned in the same breadth as Kirby Puckett where production is concerned at least not at this point.  Puckett produced a career WAR of 44.9.  Rod Carew produced a career 72 WAR and had a 5 year stretch where he produced 35 WAR.  
  20. Like
    Mark G reacted to dex8425 in As Buxton Hope Fades, Front Office Goes   
    Buxton's presence will not be missed on a nightly basis because he's never played on a nightly basis. Speed first outfielders with a long history of injury issues don't suddenly become more healthy in their 30's. He's not going to be consistently on the field. Frankly I think the Twins offer to him was more than I would've offered. I'd do a shorter higher AAV deal though.
  21. Like
    Mark G got a reaction from jkcarew in As Buxton Hope Fades, Front Office Goes   
    Pretty good assessment after the first paragraph.  As for the first paragraph.......hmm, how to be polite.    As good as Buxton is, yes, when healthy, he is not on the same planet as Rod Carew if you want to go into Twins history.  Not only did Rod have the tools, he used them.  He could turn a walk into a run better than anyone in the game.  Buxton refuses to use his speed to the degree he not only could, but should, anywhere but in the field.  He will not bunt, and steals sparingly (as in he could steal 3rd and even home far more often).  In his own words, he is "looking to drive the ball", not worry about his average, even though a higher average would put him on base more, putting him in a position to do more with his speed.  His athleticism may or may not be unmatched, but his production is far from unparalleled (no, production is not on a per game basis, it is season to season).  You have to be on the field to produce; no one has yet to produce from the trainers room.  
    Don't get me wrong; as I said, a good assessment from the 2nd paragraph down, but he has started more than 88 games only once in his career and until he does consistently, year in and year out, the jury will remain out.  Doesn't mean I wouldn't sign him, but not for the money he thinks he is worth.  Not yet, anyway.
  22. Like
    Mark G got a reaction from LanceJS in As Buxton Hope Fades, Front Office Goes   
    I get where you're coming from, but as Forrest Gump would say, fragile is as fragile does......in a nutshell, he appears to be fragile.  Twice in recent seasons he has gotten hurt simply running (Forrest never did ); not by crashing into walls, diving for balls, or sliding into bases, just by running.  And I have to admit, I am one of the folks who wonder how many other players would have broken a bone getting hit by that pitch, or is he just fragile?  There are only so many flukish injuries the same athlete can get before a pattern sets in.  And, yes, JD injures himself just running as well, but he isn't in his mid 20's anymore.  I guess my point is I don't know if folks are criticizing so much, as they are lamenting his history and wondering, because of said history, if he is worth anywhere near as much as he thinks he is.
  23. Like
    Mark G got a reaction from LanceJS in As Buxton Hope Fades, Front Office Goes   
    Pretty good assessment after the first paragraph.  As for the first paragraph.......hmm, how to be polite.    As good as Buxton is, yes, when healthy, he is not on the same planet as Rod Carew if you want to go into Twins history.  Not only did Rod have the tools, he used them.  He could turn a walk into a run better than anyone in the game.  Buxton refuses to use his speed to the degree he not only could, but should, anywhere but in the field.  He will not bunt, and steals sparingly (as in he could steal 3rd and even home far more often).  In his own words, he is "looking to drive the ball", not worry about his average, even though a higher average would put him on base more, putting him in a position to do more with his speed.  His athleticism may or may not be unmatched, but his production is far from unparalleled (no, production is not on a per game basis, it is season to season).  You have to be on the field to produce; no one has yet to produce from the trainers room.  
    Don't get me wrong; as I said, a good assessment from the 2nd paragraph down, but he has started more than 88 games only once in his career and until he does consistently, year in and year out, the jury will remain out.  Doesn't mean I wouldn't sign him, but not for the money he thinks he is worth.  Not yet, anyway.
  24. Like
    Mark G reacted to Mark Stang in As Buxton Hope Fades, Front Office Goes   
    If Buxton is sure he can make a lot more $$$ down the line, and the Twins FO can't count on him staying on the field for more than 70-80 games a year, why not shorten the # of years being offered? Instead of $80 mil for 7 years, how about $80 mil (with incentives for games played) for 5 years? If he's constantly injured, the Twins don't have him on the books after 2026. If he's health, he more than earns his money and is still young enough to go get another big contract elsewhere at age 32. 
  25. Like
    Mark G reacted to Whitey333 in As Buxton Hope Fades, Front Office Goes   
    I agree that Buxton is good.  However he is not great.  He is a career, yes did you see that, career ..247 hitter.  Don't even think of putting in with Carew and Puckett. Buxton was flailing away at the plate not too unlike Sano just very recently.  I like him and hope he stays but he hasn't proven much of anything yet except how to miss 63% of his teams games the past 4 years.  Don't compare to Donaldson big contract.  Yes he's older and has had some injuries but he has a very good and productive background.  Buxton does not.  Find a way to sign him but let's be reasonable and realistic.
×
×
  • Create New...