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
    You had just endorsed a post about valuation from poster AZTwin. AZTwin had also just posted (in this thread) a big list of mostly modest Twins prospects he felt could bring back Syndergaard and Diaz/Lugo, which I assumed you were also in agreement with. Sorry, I should have been more clear. I grabbed Smeltzer and Raley out of the list as an example of how light the Diaz side of his trade seemed; AZTwin has now specifically proposed Gordon and Romero. Still seems very light to me. Sorry to pick on you specifically. I appreciate the discussion.
  2. Otto von Ballpark
    I assume Kirilloff (plus others) are already in the deal for Syndergaard. Which is mostly fine. But you seem to be implying we can tack on a few lesser prospects like Raley to also add Diaz or Lugo -- that's what I am objecting to. (I admit I missed it if you had Graterol on there -- that helps although his shoulder makes him a pretty questionable trade chip at the present moment.)
  3. Otto von Ballpark
    I think Kirilloff has fallen out of top 20 most places, no? Teams put a premium on pitchers and up the middle players. That's why you left 5 of the top 6 Twins prospects off your list and only included Kirilloff. You can't do that and turn around and say Kirilloff is totally equivalent to those other guys. And the *Jays* sold Stroman, not the Mets. And the Jays had way more incentive to sell Stroman now than the Mets do Syndergaard. You can make an offer to the Mets for Syndergaard based on the Stroman deal, but the Mets have little reason to accept it.
  4. Otto von Ballpark
    You think people here *under*-estimate the value of Twins prospects? Yet you endorse a post that suggests Smeltzer and Raley, brought in for 2 months of Dozier just a year ago, should now be sufficient to fetch 3.5 years of a top reliever? (For the record, I think we did all right with that trade and Smeltzer in particular, but probably not *that* well!)
  5. Otto von Ballpark
    Most of those guys you list could be ranked 35th as well as 15th depending on the preferences of the evaluator. You're putting 5 of our consensus top 6 off limits too (and only offering a corner guy having a down year with wrist issues from that top 6). That tells me you're not really trying to give them "5 of our top 15" but rather a bunch of guys that someone, somewhere might rank around 15, if they happen to like that guy. (Raley?)
  6. Otto von Ballpark
    You may want to buy Diaz for a price based on his 2019 ERA. But it makes no sense for the Mets to sell Diaz for a price based on his 2019 ERA. Diaz has a much, much better track record than Pressly and significantly more control too. (And there aren't many good trade comps for Pressly, which suggests the Astros did pretty well.)
  7. Otto von Ballpark
    Could be, but I could see preferring Stroman, especially at a lower arb salary than Bauer. Not to mention, "a bird in the hand" and all that -- might be worth a little premium now to lock in one rather than hope the other is still around later. Who knows, maybe the Mets already know Cleveland wouldn't take these two prospects for Bauer.
  8. Otto von Ballpark
    If you only want to buy low on Syndergaard and Diaz, the Mets probably don't sell them.
  9. Otto von Ballpark
    There is plenty of evidence that Romero is not a MLB ready reliever. Much less one that could offset a hopeful contender losing Diaz or Lugo for 2020. And Thorpe and Littell likewise seem too early to starting pimping their trade value. If they are that good, the Twins aren't loading them up to get Diaz or Lugo. Kirilloff is a potential bat but also a corner player -- the Mets have a 1B and some corner OF already. And the Mets have nowhere to play Gordon, even if he is ready (probably not, would need at least a year to adjust). And high upside pitchers in the Twins lower minors is Duran and Balazovic. After that, the others are lotto tickets -- not valueless, but not something a contending team dumps Diaz or Lugo for.
  10. Otto von Ballpark
    2.5 years of a younger and arguably better (fWAR) Syndergaard, plus a controllable relief ace. You're getting a lot more than 1.5 years of Stroman. I wouldn't call that package "too much" to give up. (If anything, I think it's a little light on the Twins side to warrant including the reliever.)
  11. Otto von Ballpark
    But for Syndergaard alone, they should be able to get Kirilloff plus at least 2-3 of the other names, from us or from someone else. Why would they want to tack on a good reliever for 1-2 more guys? The Mets are still trying to win in 2020, and Stroman doesn't replace a lost reliever too.
  12. Otto von Ballpark
    Moved from the Lynn thread: I agree with the theoretically, but reality might not always align with the theoretical. They likely didn't have the option to only buy 1 year of Stroman. Among other upcoming 2020-2021 free agents, there is Bauer and Robbie Ray. It's questionable whether either would be available this winter either.
  13. Otto von Ballpark
    The Twins don't have many at that grade. The two Mets guys are 45 FV at Fangraphs. The only Twins pitchers meeting that are Balazovic (45), Duran (50), and Graterol (50). Especially given that Graterol has been hurt and none of the 3 are as close as one of the Mets guys, I think it's reasonable to assume it could take 2 of those 3 to definitively beat the Mets offer. Obviously the Jays aren't Fangraphs, but we can't just assume they'd like 40 FV Thorpe better than what they got either.
  14. Otto von Ballpark
    Fangraphs has the two Mets prospects as 45 FV in the Stroman deal. That's the same as Balazovic, although neither one seems as good as Balazovic -- the older one looks like more of a back-end starter, and the younger one is still a little behind Balazovic. How does that look as a premium? Stroman had that bad 2018, but logged 5.2 bWAR in 2017 and is on pace for another 5.0 this year. Worse by fWAR, of course, but on pace for a career high 4.6 this year. How easy is it to get that level of pitcher this winter? (And that's not really rhetorical, I am honestly asking and open to input here!)
  15. Otto von Ballpark
    Are Stroman level pitchers available at reasonable cost every offseason in trade? There have been some but it sure doesn't seem like it is necessarily an every offseason type thing. And if a team doesn't forecast any that they like being available in this upcoming offseason, that could justify the premium, no?
  16. Otto von Ballpark
    I think it might be a little harder to find them in the offseason than you are giving credit for. Depending on the FA market, sometimes there are very few such pitchers, with a lot of suitors, and they can command $50+ mil or even $100+ mil long term contracts. In that sense, getting a single prime year of such a pitcher might be worth the prospect premium. Especially if you like the specific pitcher -- if the Yankees, Astros, etc. trade for him now, you simply can't acquire that pitcher for 2020 no matter what. Obviously depends on the premium. I guess we have some evidence now with Stroman going to the Mets...
  17. Otto von Ballpark
    Possibly, but it seems doubtful that would be the "most likely" explanation. There are lots of PTBNL deals and very few involve recent draftees, no? It could be as simple as Miami being willing to give us 1 from a group of 3 agreed-upon players, and the Twins just wanted a little more time to check them out, and/or monitor their health if hurt, etc. They weren't at the 11th hour of the trade deadline, but I bet the Twins wanted Romo immediately and didn't want to hold the deal up to look at more minor leaguers.
  18. Otto von Ballpark
    Cleveland still holds the top wild card spot by 3.5 games. It would be rather bold to sell from that position. Is any team willing to pay for 2018 Bauer? He's still a solid arm but 2018 is looking like a bit of an anomaly. If all they get is a Stroman-type return, it's probably not worth it for Cleveland.
  19. Otto von Ballpark
    It is unusual, but the Mets could use Stroman in 2020, even if they keep Syndergaard. They are kind of irrelevant in 2019, but they are not in a rebuilding position.
  20. Otto von Ballpark
    This is true. But Greinke's list is a little unusual, even in that "leverage" context.
  21. Otto von Ballpark
    Is that true for Greinke? I have seen annual no-trade provisions like that before, but I don't know if that is universal or if it applies to the Greinke deal. If it was yearly, it would seem to be nonsensical that Greinke would list Baltimore and Detroit for 2019. "limited no-trade protection: may block trades to 15 clubs (Baltimore, Boston, Cincinnati, Colorado, Detroit, LA Angels, LA Dodgers, Minnesota, NY Yankees, Oakland, Philadelphia, San Diego, San Francisco, St. Louis, Toronto as of 11/18)"
  22. Otto von Ballpark
    I think his point is, if the Twins are on there with the Yankees, Red Sox, etc., it probably has nothing to do with contention status. Thus, the fact that the Twins are contenders in 2019 might not sway him as much as we think.
  23. Otto von Ballpark
    Parker is in a tricky spot. He is ~13 days short of 5 years service time, the threshold at which he can refuse an assignment but still collect his salary (basically forcing the team to release or trade him if they want him off the roster). He has over 3 years service time, though, as well as been outrighted before in his career, so he can still refuse an assignment, but in doing so, he would forfeit what remains on his 2019 contract. https://www.thecubreporter.com/book/export/html/3530 Since the season is about 2/3 over, Parker would stand to lose about $600k if he declines the assignment and elects free agency.
  24. Otto von Ballpark
    FWIW, Greinke's contract also has a $2 mil one-time "assignment bonus" in the event that he is traded.
  25. Otto von Ballpark
    I think it's enough of a factor to at least mention it. Also, it's not a full no-trade clause, which further works against the Twins a bit. If it affected every team equally, you could more easily dismiss it, but as it is, the Twins are on the no-trade list but contenders like the Braves, Astros, and Brewers are not. If the Diamondbacks simply want to move him for primarily salary relief, those teams are going to have an easier path to consummating a deal than the Twins.
×
×
  • Create New...