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
    Google says synonyms of caliber include quality and worth. I don't think the term was invoked to exclude age/contract/potential from player evaluation. In any case, let's drop it, it is a pointless exercise in semantics at this point.
  2. Otto von Ballpark
    That's a very specific and limited reading of that quote, and perhaps not what the author intended. Why couldn't "caliber" refer to the full shape of a player's potential and value, rather than just his strict overall on-field performance? Was Fernando Rodney the same "caliber" as Pressly last offseason? If he was, is that a useful definition of "caliber" for this discussion?
  3. Otto von Ballpark
    See my most recently reply above -- what offseason FA RP contract would you have preferred over Pressly and his arb control circa July 27, 2018?
  4. Otto von Ballpark
    In terms of cost/commitment/age/stuff/potential, I think it may not be far off. I'm not sure what FA RP contract I would have preferred to Pressly last winter. Especially when you consider the context, that the Twins needed more than just one such reliever in FA -- just replacing Pressly with another Pressly would probably be inadequate, as I think we probably needed to add one or more of that caliber of reliever even before trading Pressly.
  5. Otto von Ballpark
    If someone is claiming the Twins traded Pressly while he was an all-star, by all means correct them. But generally, I'm reading this discussion as the Twins trading their best reliever at the 2018 deadline, with the best chance of being their best reliever or even a breakout reliever in 2019 too. All of that was true at the time. (Rogers wasn't even all that great for the Twins through July 2018.) There was seemingly a bet there that Pressly wouldn't keep up his 2018 performance, or a bunch of other guys would soon emerge, or that the 2019 Twins weren't going to be all that close to contending, or that Alcala was ready to rocket to MLB. All of those were fairly questionable bets, ergo it's a pretty questionable trade even without the hindsight of his Astros performance.
  6. Otto von Ballpark
    May has a 27.1 K% versus Pressly's 33.2% last year. But sure, if the Twins traded Trevor May at the deadline this year for a couple of 40 FV lower minors prospects, and replaced him this offseason with Blake Parker, it would probably be pretty questionable too.
  7. Otto von Ballpark
    Well, there were quite a few posters who wanted to see Anderson get an audition last year instead of Belisle. And probably more who, had they known we were changing pitching coaches and Anderson was likely to be claimed in Rule 5 (hence the trade), would have liked to see Anderson get some kind of opportunity in 2019 too, perhaps at the expense of Granite, De Jong, Curtiss, or eventually Torreyes on the 40-man roster. Deprived of that knowledge and opportunity, obviously Anderson being left of the 40-man roster and subsequently traded was a pretty minor move at the time (most here didn't comment on it at all). Anderson was close enough to a MLB opportunity, and a likely enough Rule 5 pick, that I think it's fair to question it now without too much hindsight. A guy like Dereck Rodriguez was a much bigger hindsight case.
  8. Otto von Ballpark
    Ryne Harper is not really an appropriate comparison. Pressly last year not only had solid results, but also one of the highest Twins K% marks in recent memory as evidence of his improving stuff. Yes, he wasn't an all-star yet, but was pretty much our best bet at the time for reaching that level of performance/trust in the near future.
  9. Otto von Ballpark
    Yup, that is possible too. Although I wouldn't be surprised if the Braves were the only club to put in a claim either. I'm not trying to judge the actual move/non-move (personally I don't think I would have claimed him, even if I though he might be useful). Just addressing the theoretical cost issue.
  10. Otto von Ballpark
    I mentioned this in another thread recently, but Rodriguez's 2018 was pretty unsustainable by the numbers. Probably even moreso than Nick Blackburn and Scott Diamond, who at least got a lot of grounders. Reliever performance can be pretty volatile too, but at least Anderson has the peripherals to back it up (and then some). And the well-respected and competitive Rays ponying up to trade for Anderson in a pennant race is an encouraging sign for him too.
  11. Otto von Ballpark
    Actually, by Fangraphs at least, Chisholm is ahead of Kirilloff. Other sources seem to still prefer Kirilloff, but no doubt he's had a tough season. Also, Zac Gallen himself was only a 40 FV prospect preseason. I suppose there is still some question about whether he is for real going forward, or if he's a more marginal guy having a good run. In which case, he may ultimately not be any better than Thorpe or perhaps even Smelter, Dobnak, etc. Do you swap Kirilloff at a low value point, for Gallen at a high value point? It would be tempting for sure.
  12. Otto von Ballpark
    What good is the utility of the money right now? There is literally nowhere else for this club to spend $2 mil in 2019. And you'd really be cool with the Twins putting Buxton out in the field and on the bases with an unhealed dislocated shoulder, just to save $2 mil on Hamilton? I'm no injury expert, but getting Buxton's shoulder to heal and avoiding it becoming a more serious injury could be worth a good chunk of that $2 mil, no? That said, I didn't expect Hamilton to get claimed, and I don't necessarily know whether Hamilton would be a worthwhile addition to the Twins. But, if you determine that you want him or that kind of player, the $2 mil shouldn't be much of a hurdle at this point.
  13. Otto von Ballpark
    60 at Fangraphs. 70 at MLB (not sure if MLB inflates some components like they inflate overall FV, though). Of course, even if he is fast enough (although he hasn't played outfield as a pro), adding him now still has long-term 40-man / Rule 5 implications, as opposed to Hamilton who you can set free after the season/postseason.
  14. Otto von Ballpark
    Any specific suggestions? 80-grade speed guys don't exactly grow on trees. Gabriel Maciel (70) is our only guy above 60 speed at Fangraphs, and he'd have to jump from high-A right now (and be added to the 40-man roster a year earlier than necessary).
  15. Otto von Ballpark
    I think the hope would be that we'd be playing beyond six weeks with him.
  16. Otto von Ballpark
    You may not think much of Jazz Chisholm, but he's the #30 prospect at Fangraphs right now with a 55 FV. Also #57 at MLB.com, and was #59 at BA / #69 at BP preseason. For the Twins to beat that offer may have taken Lewis or Kirilloff.
  17. Otto von Ballpark
    GIven that Moya is still pitching at AA, after a demotion from AAA less than a month ago, I suspect not. 7.63 ERA at Rochester suggests he may not have adjusted to the MLB ball too well!
  18. Otto von Ballpark
    Would it have been better if their throws were switched?
  19. Otto von Ballpark
    The throw was very low to the ground. Which implies the catcher would need to widen his stance to field it, as compared to receiving a higher throw. And his stance was widened only as he was moving his whole body in the direction of the throw. All of that seems allowable by the rule. Catchers aren't required to wait for the throw in a seated or kneeling position. Keep in mind, the rule was put in place to protect catchers from collisions. After some initial confusion, I think they've tightened up enforcement over the past few years with that purpose in mind, although such things still aren't 100% consistent or predictable. Which is why it still may have been worth a challenge (although that's precisely what I hate about the challenge system).
  20. Otto von Ballpark
    That's a possible interpretation of the written rule, but in application, I don't think that distinction matters too much. Here's the video frame from the recent Twins-Cleveland game, when Adrianza got thrown out at the plate. Obviously Adrianza was much further away at the time, but the Cleveland catcher likely had his foot in the same spot before he caught the ball. In application, I don't think there's any "magic line" that Sano crossed, as compared to Adrianza -- neither was blocked by the foot while the ball was not in the catcher's possession. Here's the rule Brian quoted last night:
  21. Otto von Ballpark
    Perhaps it should have been challenged, but I'm not sure I agree with your conclusion that it was a violation. Below is the exact moment where the ball enters the catcher's glove (and presumably the catcher gains the full right to place his foot wherever he wants). As you can see, Sano's hand has not yet reached the foot, thus he hasn't been blocked by it yet.
  22. Otto von Ballpark
    Cave has a kinda-flukey 7 HBP in 134 PA this season. He had only 7 in 559 PA all of last year, and similar or lower rates previously in his career. So unless it is a new skill, he should only have 1-2 HBP at this point in 2019. Taking those HBP out of the equation, his OBP would only be .322 for the season. Also, that stat line relies heavily on a .389 BABIP too, compared to a league rate of .300. He did manage a .363 mark in MLB last year but I am not sure I want to count on either going forward. On a fully healthy roster, there is no regular/platoon starting spot for Cave in this outfield.
  23. Otto von Ballpark
    They changed it a few years ago, I think. Makes sense because you can actually change your 25 man roster between postseason series now too. If you want to add a guy who was in your org, but not on the 40-man as of Aug. 31st, you need to get the injury exception thing.
  24. Otto von Ballpark
    Hamilton has actually never been optioned! So he has all 3 left. However, he has over 5 years service time, so he has the right to refuse any optional assignment. But it's possible you could get him to agree to a temporary optional assignment -- Anibal Sanchez agreed to one a couple years ago for the Tigers, so he could start in AAA for a bit rather than be buried at the bottom of the MLB pen. That said, keep in mind that claiming him now would put you on the hook for ~$2 mil ($1 mil remaining salary, $1 mil contract option buyout for 2020). Unless you *really* want Hamilton and you *really* are concerned about him landing elsewhere, it's probably better to let him go unclaimed and try to sign him as a free agent for league minimum (roughly $150k the rest of the season).
  25. Otto von Ballpark
    All you need to do, to make them eligible for the postseason without any injury tricks, is get them on the 40-man roster before midnight August 31st. You can even add them to the 40-man the evening of August 31st, and promote them to MLB the next morning (Sep. 1st) once rosters have expanded. Or let them stay down a couple days longer, if you want. Either way, I'd still call that a "September call-up" and they'd be eligible for the postseason.
×
×
  • Create New...