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

Forums

Blogs

Events

Store

Downloads

Gallery

Everything posted by drjim

  1. drjim
    Of course this is true, but they have talent and there can be some expectations. It seems to always come back to the front office, but also not against the rules for players to take the opportunities they are given and perform.
  2. drjim
    Mauer clearly deseves blame. Also would have been nice if one (or two or even three) of Vargas/Arcia/Pinto decided to show up this year. Any of them would look nice in the middle of the order.
  3. drjim
    They will take a couple, but Johnson specifically mentioned the weakness of catching in this draft class.
  4. drjim
    There was even steam for him going #3 overall for a while. Getting him at #6 is solid. I just don't see a clear alternative that they passed on, and overall the top of the draft just wasn't that great this year. Perhaps that is part of the trepidation for this pick.
  5. drjim
    If you get a major leaguer and a piece for an important trade (Ladendorf) I can imagine much worst drafts. But man, completely whiffing 27 and 31 is rough.
  6. drjim
    8 years is about right before you can know for sure about a draft.
  7. drjim
    That debate was quite impressive - examples cited that had nothing to do with the main point against criticisms based on assumptions pulled from thin air.
  8. drjim
    Out of curiosity do you have any reference to how many relievers other teams draft and are you sure the Twins draft significantly more? Individual drafts they have gone heavy, but is this true over an extended period of time?
  9. drjim
    Clearly the Twins are zagging while the more data driven orgs zig.
  10. drjim
    Or somewhere in between.
  11. drjim
    Thanks for that research. I was actually going to do the same thing this afternoon. 1 starting pitcher is problematic, but certainly not way out of the norm. People underestimate the amount of player movement that happens around the league. I think that there are a lot of critiques about the Twins and their development and roster construction that seem bad on their own but really aren't that much of an outlier compared to the rest of the league. The goal of course is the be the best. Failing that, it does help to have proper context and perspective.
  12. drjim
    Of course they have final say on decisions, but they likely aren't going to go against what the scouting director recommends. If they did, then they would have the wrong scouting director.
  13. drjim
    Did you hear that correctly or did I? I thought he said they had starters rated highly that got drafted just ahead of where they took the relievers. So the reason they took so many relievers was in response to the way the draft was going, not because they specifically targeted relievers.
  14. drjim
    All the more reason why his performance at this moment relative to other first basemen is meaningless.
  15. drjim
    But it is an interesting idea, fun to discuss on fan forums, but not happening (intentionally) in the real world.
  16. drjim
    The bigger issue is that people can speculate but they have no idea how good or bad a draft will be. And scouts and officials almost always underrate the current draft compared to future drafts. A year ago this draft was thought of as better than it turned out to be. Injuries and poor performance can do that. Take the good prospect why you can. Plus no guarantee you will be around next year to reap the benefits if you choose this course of action.
  17. drjim
    Suzuki batting 7th again, Escobar at SS and batting 8th. Looks like all our dreams may soon come true.
  18. drjim
    He did. I agree with him. True talent level needs to improve to sustain.
  19. drjim
    One thought I have had on luck/randomness in the context of baseball analysis is that it might be too much of a go to phrase to explain the things that currently can't be captured objectively. Saying we aren't sure is not as interesting as saying it is luck/randomness. I suspect that in the near future some (if not much) of this will be captured in some way. And for the Twins, I think the main reason for the current record is clustering. I don't know if this is luck or random but likely unsustainable (which all might be the same thing). My much more cynical thought on this is that people who really, really accept baseball metrics and use them to completely explain the game and expected outcomes struggle when things fall outside the model. Easier to describe as random/luck than to look at possible intangible explanations and/or emphasize errors in the models. (And by errors I don't mean they are necessarily "wrong" but difficulty in capturing outliers). All that said, I don't think the Twins are a magical team that will defy all metrics forever. They are going to have to improve their true talent level one way or the other to stay in the playoff race. And I am an economist by training, so I am just practicing my ability to speak out of all sides of my mouth.
  20. drjim
    No, but that is a me issue.
  21. drjim
    I would say the first and third points are basically the same, and as you point out, probably beyond his control at the moment. The second point already saw an adjustment yesterday, and probably will going forward. Especially if they address point one and three. For Mauer, I think it is going to take a month or two more of really poor hitting to move him from his spot. When they finally call up one of the three young hitters three of your four concerns will be addressed.
  22. drjim
    Terry Ryan didn't confirm or deny anything about luck. He didn't mention it (at least not in this article).
  23. drjim
    The way I think about it is that there is no difference in how well they are written, researched, reasoned etc, just that "positive" articles when a team is playing well just aren't that interesting. "Negative" articles are much more worthy of discussion and worthy of a deeper look, which will generally lead to more thorough critiques of everything about the article. Those articles are interesting to critique in the same way that it is interesting to critique a team that is playing above what would be expected. The flip side, in my opinion, is that the last four years (at least the last two) probably worked in reverse. So many articles pointing out the flaws of a bad team probably became tiresome and generated less of a deeper look. Articles that tried to spin "positive" would have been worthy of more discussion and a more thorough critique of the specifics written in the article. Doubtful they were worse written, reasoned or researched.
  24. drjim
    I thought the popular opinion was that positive articles were ignored?
  25. drjim
    It is generally considered to be very strong, but as said injuries and poor performance can change that.
×
×
  • Create New...