Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

Otto von Ballpark

Old-Timey Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    20,662

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    74

 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 Otto von Ballpark

  1. Otto von Ballpark
    Capps was a bad deal, but irrelevant to the current conversation. May was a buy-low candidate, his modest prospect stock was weak at the time. Worley was kind of a buy low in the same package, he had already started to fade and had an injury. Meyer was on the rise, and a good argument why it's best not to trade a controllable asset 1-for-1 for a single prospect.
  2. Otto von Ballpark
    Any word on when your clients Mark Trumbo and Chris Carter will be signing this winter?
  3. Otto von Ballpark
    Is this becoming a limbo? "How low can you go?"
  4. Otto von Ballpark
    Yeah, by that criteria, I'd bet virtually every team, every season has at least a similar chance to hang in the WC picture. It can't be enough to move the needle on planning.
  5. Otto von Ballpark
    It's not a factor unless it changes the amount of return we are looking for in Dozier. And frankly, it shouldn't.
  6. Otto von Ballpark
    That's probably the most important goal, yes. But in the new CBA, MLB has taken a more aggressive position about withholding bonus pool money as punishment too. http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2016/12/mlb-mlbpa-agree-to-new-collective-bargaining-agreement.html In that light, that July 2nd thing and 6 month rule make sense. You can't trade future bonus pool money that's further than 6 months away (not unreasonable), and by forcing future bonus pool money to be traded as "future considerations", you essentially require the teams to have a contingency plan in place in case MLB withholds future bonus pool money as a punishment. (Like how "PTBNL or cash" trades generally have a contingency of another player or cash in case a player is injured.) Make the teams plan for it, so the league doesn't have to unravel an already completed transaction later.
  7. Otto von Ballpark
    Of course it's possible that the Twins contend in 2017, but you can't act solely on what is possible, you have to take into account what is probable. The 2008 Twins were probable contenders, simply on the basis of returning the same young club that won 96 games in 2006. The 2015 Twins winning 83 games doesn't help the probability for 2017 quite so much, plus there's that 59 win season last year and four straight 90 loss seasons before that... simply put, it's not probable.
  8. Otto von Ballpark
    Well, they still have 6 months to plan. MLB doesn't allow much draft pick trading either, so I think they try to discourage teams from dealing these resources. I also think MLB prevents bonus pool trading until July 2nd to somewhat discourage pre-July 2nd deals with prospects. Also, I wonder if it helps them keep bonus pool adjustments as a punishment option -- say, if team A traded away from its future bonus pool, and then is revealed to have broken some international signing rules like the Red Sox did. Hard to take away from the future bonus pool after it has already been traded!
  9. Otto von Ballpark
    The NL West also includes the launching pads in Denver and Phoenix, so I doubt it's much of a consideration.
  10. Otto von Ballpark
    I think trades have 6 months to be fully settled if they involve PTBNL or cash considerations. So a deal consummated now could include considerations decided on July 2nd.
  11. Otto von Ballpark
    40 HR guys are so rare, Dozier himself has done it only once in four full seasons! Actually that was his only time breaking the 30 HR mark too. The point about Killebrew's era is that, even if Dozier is a true 40 HR, 5 tool infielder, he's gone from Minnesota in 2 years anyway (or very expensive if we manage to keep him). That was never a consideration for the Twins about Killebrew. Plus, the Twins of that era were never as bad as the 2016 team, meaning their outlook for contention was generally much better than that of the 2017-2018 Twins. If Dozier was cheaply controlled in perpetuity like Killebrew was, or if the Twins were coming off even a .500-ish season in 2016, I guarantee we wouldn't be discussing a potential trade much if at all. This isn't about Dozier's performance as much as it is about the Twins and his pending free agency.
  12. Otto von Ballpark
    Depends on the source. Certainly not at Fangraphs. Also "higher rated" doesn't necessarily mean more valuable, depending on the context. Ceiling might be more valuable to some teams/situations than floor. Alvarez in particular seems to have a much higher ceiling, while Calhoun would have the higher floor.
  13. Otto von Ballpark
    The 1964 Twins didn't lose 103 games. In fact, while they only won 79, they were coming off consecutive 91 win seasons in 1962-63 so they very much expected to contend in 1965. Killebrew had a career 142 OPS+ at that point. Dozier's is 108. His 137 last year represented a career high. Through 1964, Killebrew was on a steak of 6 consecutive seasons at or above that mark. Due to the rules at the time, Killebrew's playing rights were the permanent property of the Twins, on year to year contracts at a salary essentially of the teams choosing (just enough to keep him from holding out or retiring). Dozier is guaranteed $15 mil for the next two seasons thanks to arbitration rights which did not exist for Killebrew, after which he is guaranteed free agency, another right which obviously did not exist for Killebrew (and indeed would not come to MLB until after Killebrew retired). I will also keep in mind your description of a top ~10 MLB pitching prospect as "a possible back end starter that has never won in the Bigs" for the next time the Twins have such a player. Something tells me you won't be so dismissive of the asset when it belongs to your club...
  14. Otto von Ballpark
    FWIW, the Dodgers didn't exit in the first round this year; they actually took the NLCS to 6 games against the eventual champion Cubs.
  15. Otto von Ballpark
    Urias is probably as good a bet as any to ascend to that plateau next.
  16. Otto von Ballpark
    Can your source also confirm the Dodgers amusement now as the Twins try to leak rumors about St Louis and other clubs? Because they have to be either amused or offended by the Twins dawdling over their fairly aggressive offer. For that matter, now that we know the Twins are leaking info to Doogie, wouldn't the Twins have leaked the De Leon and Alvarez offer by now to try to improve their bargaining with St Louis, San Fran, etc.? Almost a month has passed, De Leon has long been confirmed, and multiple teams have been involved, yet no one but you has confirmed Alvarez has been offered with De Leon. Seems far more likely that Alvarez hasn't been offered with De Leon. How does your source reconcile all of the above? I should add, I have never picked on you or your source, I am simply trying to figure this out, maybe to elicit an explanation from your source...
  17. Otto von Ballpark
    Dave, you have to seriously doubt your source's report that DeLeon plus Alvarez are on the table, right? Not only have the Twins sat on the offer nearly a month now, but they are apparently leaking suspect reports of interest from other teams. Even in the freewheeling world of MLB GMs, actions have consequences, and the Twins would be seriously jeopardizing that aggressive Dodgers offer if this is how they responded. The sticking point has to be the second piece, not the third (at least, not the third behind DeLeon and Alvarez).
  18. Otto von Ballpark
    But they will have 6 years to make those other big changes with DeLeon and company, versus only 2 years with Dozier.
  19. Otto von Ballpark
    I think it's worth noting how horribly White started in 2006. Zero HR and .182/.209/.215 for a .425 OPS over 191 PA, before they mercifully found a way to justify a DL stint in mid-June. Hit a HR in his first game back in July, and compiled a .892 OPS the rest of the season. That's what got him brought back for 2007 (well, that and his cheap price tag) -- not his small playoff sample that year.
  20. Otto von Ballpark
    Does it make that much sense? The Cardinals depth chart right now has Matt Carpenter at 1B. If they wanted extra offense, wouldn't it make far more sense to shift him back to a 3B or 2B and add a 1B bat? It would seem wasteful to pay a premium for a 2B under those circumstances. (They also just gave up a draft pick to sign Fowler, so if they had wanted to bid on Encarnacion, it would have only cost them a second rounder.) That's why I agree with the latter part of your post -- I think with the Dodger talks stalled, there is an opening for the Cardinals to make a modest offer for Dozier. I suspect they will come no closer to our (apparent) asking price than the Dodgers, however.
  21. Otto von Ballpark
    Do you have a cite for this? I am not sure I buy that our baseball minds were that eager to expand internationally. TR was getting approval for millions to spend on Ramon Ortiz while our international efforts were still languishing. I think the slow to change attitudes of our baseball people probably played just as large of a role as financial limitations. That said, they did notably improve in this area by 2009, so it's not particularly relevant anymore.
  22. Otto von Ballpark
    Boycott over, but suspended players not likely to be reinstated (at least not quickly): http://m.startribune.com/gophers-players-u-leaders-working-toward-ending-boycott-of-football/407201426/?section=%2F
  23. Otto von Ballpark
    Why didn't the marching band simply refuse to yield? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y5ecvBaqHBk&t=280
  24. Otto von Ballpark
    Interesting question! The next Moncada or Alvarez (20 year old Cuban stars) could sign a ~4 year deal in Japan, getting more money than any MLB team could offer, and then come to the USA at age 25 and sign a MLB deal with zero restrictions.
  25. Otto von Ballpark
    The $100k is the up-front payment, but at any point the player can be returned for $50k, so it's really only a net $50k investment to make a Rule 5 pick. That's still peanuts for every MLB team. And the Rule 5 player's minimum salary is offset by whatever player they would be replacing on the 25 man roster. If the Twins didn't pick Haley, they'd just give that spot and its salary to someone like Pat Light, or sign another vet for even more than the minimum salary like Abad last season. If teams don't make a Rule 5 pick, it's not about money -- it's about having a better use of the 40-man / 25-man roster spot.
×
×
  • Create New...