Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

Otto von Ballpark

Old-Timey Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    20,669

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    74

 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 Otto von Ballpark

  1. Otto von Ballpark
    FWIW, in the MLB qualifying offer preview, they lump Pineda in with Gibson and others as unlikely to receive one: https://www.mlb.com/news/2020-qualifying-offer-candidates-and-updates
  2. Otto von Ballpark
    I think it would be about $13.5 mil (39 games left on his suspension would cover the first 45 days of the 2020 season, out of a total 186 days, with $17.8 mil qualifying offer). But we'd also be without his services until May 10th. Is that worth a guaranteed $13.5 mil? He couldn't play for anyone else until May 10th either, so that's going to depress his market this offseason. Maybe we'd be better off skipping the QO and just negotiating with him while his value is depressed -- we could get a lower rate, incentive structure, 2nd year/option, etc. I have a feeling Pineda would readily accept the QO which suggests that maybe it isn't the best move for the team. But not making it would involve some risk too.
  3. Otto von Ballpark
    The Cubs had 90 Pythag wins and the Brewers 81 (and the Cards 92) -- are we really sure the Cubs are the 3rd best in their division? Or did they just happen to finish 3rd this year? The Cubs were basically 3rd in the *league* in both OPS+ and ERA+ in 2019, with basically the same marks as the champ Nationals. STL had a notably worse OPS+ and MIL a notably worse ERA+. Yeah, Flaherty looks pretty great for the Cards, but their other SP aren't all that young or great either (Hudson had pretty poor peripherals this year). Milwaukee's got Yelich but lots of holes too. More to the point -- what would your hypothetical Cubs firesale look like?
  4. Otto von Ballpark
    Soroka was limited in 2018 (56.1 IP combined AAA/MLB), but he threw 143 and 153.2 innings in 2016 and 2017, respectively. All told, Soroka wound up throwing 191 innings in 2019, combined between AAA/MLB and the postseason. By comparison, Graterol only has 224.2 innings for his entire pro career to date, barely more than Soroka's 2019 output. Graterol's single season high is 102, significantly less than TWO pre-2019 Soroka seasons. Also, while both guys had shoulder issues, Graterol has also had Tommy John surgery already, suggesting even further caution.
  5. Otto von Ballpark
    Slightly weird article, because Soroka didn't actually start 2019 in the Braves rotation -- although he made only 2 starts at AAA before getting promoted.
  6. Otto von Ballpark
    Not really. Primarily, Dyson had shoulder surgery, not the more standard Tommy John elbow surgery like Pineda in 2017, so the recovery is less predictable. Plus Pineda had his surgery several months earlier -- July 2017 compared to October 2019 -- so his return was expected sooner. Plus Pineda is several years younger than Dyson. But perhaps more than all of that, SP are in greater demand than RP -- partially illustrated by the salary differential. It might be worth it to commit early to a $10 mil guy, but probably not for a ~$3 mil guy. (And indeed, I can't recall any relievers on Dyson's level signing a rehab contract like that, while I can think of many SP.)
  7. Otto von Ballpark
    Pretty sure players and agencies have plenty of resources in that regard. It's not like Dyson is alone in this circumstance.
  8. Otto von Ballpark
    I thought this was an informative article at ESPN: "Why did those World Series games last so long?" https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/27977973/why-did-world-series-games-last-long They study Game 4, a 4-1 Astros win which took 4 hours, 3 minutes. 4-1 regular season games this year averaged only 2 hours, 55 minutes. Here's what they found made up the 68 minute difference: Personally, it would be nice to speed the regular season games by about ~20 minutes (pitch clock, stay in the box, not granting time) and reduce the baseline for postseason games -- and maybe cut even further into the #3 dawdling time.
  9. Otto von Ballpark
    Depending on what you mean by "underwrite", Dyson has lifetime health insurance, so I'd guess actual rehab expenses may be covered. He'll be without a salary during rehab, though.
  10. Otto von Ballpark
    What's the evidence of that drastic landscape alteration, at this point? It doesn't seem apparent in playoff results so far...
  11. Otto von Ballpark
    It was a steep price, but the alternative would have been steep in a way too -- Luzardo, Giolito, Lopez, and Dunning have all missed seasons / had awful seasons since leaving Washington. Their forecasts were a lot more variable / speculative than the players Washington took back, and perhaps most importantly, the players Washington already assembled. Keeping those prospects may have offered more long-term individual player upside, but it also would have increased the risk of jeopardizing the investments Washington already made in Scherzer, Strasburg, Rendon, etc. Teams can't and shouldn't always prioritize 4 years from now ahead of the present.
  12. Otto von Ballpark
    Why? And how would that look? They were a 90 win Pythag team last year, and aren't losing anybody too notable.
  13. Otto von Ballpark
    Yeah, and waiting for the start of an inning, after Greinke was deemed finished, presumably when they had the lead, was the moment that never came. From the Astros perspective, I liked letting Greinke start the 7th. I would have left him in to finish the inning -- Rendon got the dinger but I didn't think the Nats were going to square him up much more. But if you really want to take him out mid-inning, just go with Cole -- I had a feeling the Nats were ready for the Astros relievers.
  14. Otto von Ballpark
    What a game! The final scores are a little deceptive, because this game (and game 6) were darn entertaining. I didn't think the Nats had a chance, the way Scherzer and Greinke looked. Rooting for the Nats, I was giddy when the Astros went to Harris -- and was puzzled how we never saw Cole. Waiting for a moment that never came...?
  15. Otto von Ballpark
    Well, first base is kind of special, because the runner is allowed to overrun it. Any other base, and the runner is more than likely sliding and rendering interference mostly moot. Maybe they could make a Nick Punto rule and require everyone to slide into first.
  16. Otto von Ballpark
    Here or there?
  17. Otto von Ballpark
    I spoke too soon -- Suzuki has been scratched, so Yan Gomes is back in the starting lineup.
  18. Otto von Ballpark
    Other players may also walk away with one, but it won't belong to them. Don't forget 2018-spring-training-Twin Anibal Sanchez!
  19. Otto von Ballpark
    Lineups announced already -- Kurt Suzuki is back! That's the only change from the game 6 lineups.
  20. Otto von Ballpark
    Wednesday, Oct. 30 This is it! Last baseball game of the year! For all the marbles! (Perhaps not literal marbles!) 7:08 pm CST Nationals at Astros (World Series Game 7, series tied 3-3) TV: FOX (free!) Pitching matchup is Scherzer vs Greinke
  21. Otto von Ballpark
    Well, that's what I said. The Astros played under the same rules, but Altuve didn't experience the same circumstances as Turner. I agree that runners follow the Turner path all the time -- and the rules allow them to! The rules also say that if contact occurs on that path, interference should be called on the runner. It's a risk they take. I'm all for changing the rules and the base to lessen that risk, and reduce the required ump judgement.
  22. Otto von Ballpark
    I agree, Turner wasn't doing anything flagrant or disruptive by the way he ran to first -- but that's not the standard of the rulebook (and I'm frankly glad it isn't, because that would open up a whole 'nother can of worms!). The current setup is in fact "fair" to the runner in that it's codified in the common rulebook -- the Astros runners played the game last night under the same rules, but just avoided the circumstance that happened to Turner. I agree, though, that the current setup may not be equitable for the runner, especially a right-handed one, but I don't want umps going rogue to make that determination either. It should be addressed by a change to the rulebook and a change to the base itself.
  23. Otto von Ballpark
    Well, the purpose of the foul territory running lane is to keep the runner as much out of fair territory as possible. That purpose would indeed be defeated if another, equal, fair territory running lane was created. Also, worth noting that the foul line itself is considered part of the current running lane, and is also considered fair territory. (And overlaps with the base.) Turner didn't ever have to run in foul territory to be in compliance with the rule here -- just getting on the baseline would have been enough. And frankly, just close to the baseline (one foot, maybe?), at some point in his sprint, and the ump probably doesn't make the judgement call of interference either, but Turner was never anywhere close to the baseline. Also worth remembering that this probably doesn't affect left-handed batters....
  24. Otto von Ballpark
    Maybe we're getting our terms confused? I am talking about the running lane, which is between the foul line and the extra line in foul territory. Turner never came close to that. If he had, it's likely his last step wouldn't have been where it was -- but even if it was, he would have still received the benefit of the doubt about his collision with fielder and ball, from the rulebook and likely from the umpire as well.
  25. Otto von Ballpark
    I understand why players -- retired or otherwise -- wouldn't like it. But I also understand why the rule is there in the first place, and why umps call it like they did last night. The rule *is* about where the runner runs! And if they stay in the lane, there won't be interference (as long as they're not swinging around their arms ). The problem is, the lane isn't in a straight path to first base. The double first base bag would solve that issue.
×
×
  • Create New...