Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

drjim

Provisional Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    8,759

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    28

 Content Type 

Profiles

News

Minnesota Twins Videos

2026 Minnesota Twins Top Prospects Ranking

2022 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks

Minnesota Twins Free Agent & Trade Rumors, Notes, & Tidbits

Guides & Resources

2023 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks

The Minnesota Twins Players Project

2024 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks

2025 Minnesota Twins Draft Pick Tracker

2026 Minnesota Twins Draft Tracker: Picks & Bonuses

Forums

Blogs

Events

Store

Downloads

Gallery

Everything posted by drjim

  1. drjim
    I think you make a great point. I love prospects as much as the next person, but I think people vastly overrate them in the current climate. That said, it is the right move to trade guys in the last year of their deal if they don't have a future with the team (Willingham, Correia and eventually Morales) or to move bullpen arms if the return is enough (Fien). Suzuki is the tricky one for all the reasons discussed.
  2. drjim
    I think he legitimately gets a B prospect right now, which is a nice return for a fa signed to a one year deal. Twins comparable would be Thorpe, Rosario or Polanco.
  3. drjim
    Just want to add that this list is spot on. Twins could realistically trade all 6. This will be a telling trade deadline for the Twins. I imagine they are in a bit of a bind. They could be aggressive and sell off the pieces but they also have (perceived) business considerations. With the all star game this season they will have no more gimmicks to fall back upon for ticket sales. I wonder if they see value in trying to have a semi-respectable finish to the season (low to mid 70s wins) as having value in retaining a season ticket base. If they sell off 6 guys that could make it more difficult. My take is there really would be little difference between 75 and 68 wins as far as ticket sales would go. Two things ultimately draw fans, winning or exciting young players. I would go for the second option, dump the vets, get whatever prospects possible, call up the kids, and let the excitement grow organically.
  4. drjim
    I wouldn't say he is off limits, I just don't see a scenario where he gets moved. Players in his position, still pre-arb, very rarely get moved in season because it is so hard to get enough in return without getting an mlb player (and a team acquiring him likely doesn't have a mlb caliber player to spare). He will have pretty much the same value in the offseason as he will now so there is no rush.
  5. drjim
    The most important thing to know about WAR is that it is terrible to cite for small sample sizes because the defensive side of the equation skews it immensely and it will overrate hot streaks. And it is important to go at least +/- 1 WAR at a minimum when comparing players. I am biased because I think WAR is used much too often and much too confidently. It does have value when comparing players across positions and across eras.
  6. drjim
    Russell is generally considered around the #5 (or so) guy. I don't think I would swap Dozier for him
  7. drjim
    You are correct, looking back I realize now that I misread what he wrote - I didn't catch he was adding Sanchez and Stroman in addition to the names he wrote. I would consider that a substantial offer and certainly worth consideration. My apologies jokin.
  8. drjim
    You named one guy who hit free agency, so I do appreciate you confirming my point. Of the guys you listed, I would only put Cano and Kinsler clearly ahead of Dozier, and they make 45 and 30 times as much as Dozier this season and next, which is of course part of his value in a trade.
  9. drjim
    Nor do you have many opportunities to have cost controlled 20/20 2B with good OBP and elite defense that are actually at that level instead of potentially. That trade will be there in the offseason and many other teams would be interested in some Dozier action as well (though the Twins would almost certainly not move him). There is no reason to trade him now unless you are blown away and then some. And I don't want to dog Sanchez, very good prospect. Dozier is just worth more.
  10. drjim
    I wouldn't do that package even without throwing in another player. You really undervalue Dozier imo.
  11. drjim
    Dodgers and Jays too. There would be a nice market if Ryan makes him available.
  12. drjim
    Can we stop letting facts get in the way of a narrative?
  13. drjim
    I'm not sure that guy even exists.
  14. drjim
    Seems the Twins aren't the organization that smear players on their way out. (And for the record, accusations against the Twins on this are blown way out of proportion imo).
  15. drjim
    I think he is even more valuable than one top 20 prospect. For thought experiment, I don't think I would be happy if they traded him for Bundy, or for a more recent example, if they traded him straight up for Russell (or probably even the entire package the Cubs just got).
  16. drjim
    I'm sure the O's and Jays would love to get Dozier, but I think you are undervaluing him with these types of proposals. I'm not sure either team has a prospect only package they could offer right now that would be enough. Trading Dozier would require a mlb player and no team is going to do that at the deadline.
  17. drjim
    It is a new move to trade a prospect that highly rated, but over the past several years he has traded decent prospects for decent mlb players. I think Beane was quoted as saying something to the effect that he had trouble acquiring prospects so he determined prospects were overvalued, so trading them for established mlbers was his new "moneyball".
  18. drjim
    The A's trade prospects for established players, and they trade players near free agency (usually two years away) to reload their system and acquire replacements. Trading Dozier at this time doesn't fit either of these categories. Two years of peak control at low cost amounts to more than a "quibble" in my mind, but you are free to interpret as you will.
  19. drjim
    Trading Dozier right now would not be an A's move. They don't create holes by trading good players 4 years away from FA. They trade established players 2 years away from free agency when they have replacements ready or are receiving a replacement in return (hint hint). The only way you could justify trading Dozier would be if you are convinced he has peaked this year (I'm not - he should have another 2-3 years at this level) and you are receiving mlb talent at a position of need (which is not what was proposed). That type of trade can really only happen in the offseason.
  20. drjim
    The way I see it - Correia, Willingham, Morales will not be on the team next year. There is no reason to keep them past August. Suzuki could go either way - high value now but certainly worth considering an extension. The one x factor is that the best position prospect the Twins have that can play in the majors right now is a C. He could theoretically be replaced for the rest of the season. Bullpen arms are what they are - and the Twins have guys in AAA to replace them. That is why I see this as a unique situation with guys with expiring contracts that actually have a little value along with bodies to fill the spots. The Twins certainly should be more aggressive this trade deadline than they have the past couple of years.
  21. drjim
    I don't understand the reasoning behind trading a 2B to acquire more pitching to later turn around and trade that pitching for a different 2B to replace the one you just traded. And 2B that are as good as Dozier and hit free agency are very rare indeed.
  22. drjim
    No chance the Twins trade Dozier, but I certainly endorse the Suzuki to Baltimore idea.
  23. drjim
    I think this is spot on. The overall talent level in the organization is vastly improved over the past couple of years. It will take a couple of years for every for everything to shake out, but the future is bright, no reason to do anything crazy. That said, I think there is an opportunity during this deadline. There actually are some assets to move in the last year of their deals (plus some relief arms) and the Twins actually have some guys to replace them - especially arm wise. Some aggressive trades could really infuse the system with some additional depth while doing nothing to harm the long term future of the squad - and perhaps even helping by bringing the prospects up.
  24. drjim
    Thank you for doing this. I heard Nate Silver and Keith Law do a podcast several months ago. One application of metrics Silver suggested had to do with cross checking scouting evaluations. By this he meant evaluating reports of scouts over a set period of time and seeing if they would consistently over- or under-rate talent in their reports and to use analytics to "adjust" their scouting reports accordingly for final reports (but still use the valuable resource of scouts). I'm curious if this is something the Twins do? I know there is an infrastructure of scouts (local, area, cross-checker, etc) - but are analytics used to analyze the scouts themselves?
  25. drjim
    That ship probably sailed when Buxton and Sano both went down.
×
×
  • Create New...