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
    Kirilloff info from Danchat here: http://twinsdaily.com/topic/33539-article-twins-minor-league-report-614-blankenhorn-walk-off-winner-lifts-wahoos/?do=findComment&comment=863217
  2. Otto von Ballpark
    Bowyer's arm should be well rested too, as he hasn't thrown a pitch in organized ball since the trade.
  3. Otto von Ballpark
    Could be. Fangraphs has Cleveland projected to finish 3 games behind Boston, and that's with 2.6 more WAR from Carrasco, Ramirez rebounding with 2.7 more WAR, Kipnis rebounding a little with 0.8, etc. Netting another 0.8 from Encarnacion would help, of course, but it still may not be enough. (Boston presumably plans to add a pitcher in trade too?)
  4. Otto von Ballpark
    Doesn't that limit your 2019 options even more? How long as you willing to wait on Boyd? (Or wild card Syndergaard?)
  5. Otto von Ballpark
    As in overrated? Or as in, you'd pay the Archer cost from last year to get him?
  6. Otto von Ballpark
    Perez's history of reliable starting doesn't look all that different from Gibson's or Odorizzi's (pre-2019). I think having a reasonable option on his services for 2020 is worth noting, in addition to Berrios's team control. I understand the desire to add another SP for 2020 -- but how much are you willing to risk getting shut out of any 2019 SP additions to do that? There's a real chance if you wait out Stroman and Boyd, you might be left with nothing -- which doesn't help 2020 either.
  7. Otto von Ballpark
    I think it's fair to question Dipoto's deals in Seattle, but the Yankees took on $8 mil here. I don't see Cleveland or Tampa taking on anywhere near that much, to say nothing of exceeding the Yankee prospect offer. (Juan Then is a lotto ticket to be sure, although he was 40 FV per Fangraphs -- it's not like he was just an org depth piece or something.) Boston doesn't seem to have a ton of urgency either (and they are much more limited than the Yankees in maneuvering under the $246 mil luxury tax threshold -- even $3 mil from Encarnacion could severely hamper any further trades they want to make in 2019, i.e. for a pitcher).
  8. Otto von Ballpark
    But is an overrated Archer really any better than a rental like Bumgarner? And who is the 2019 version of Archer? And will their teams only trade them if they too think they are overrated (as the 2018 Rays likely thought of Archer)? Take a look at that MLBTR top 50 link I shared above. If the Tigers don't make Boyd available (or don't deal him within the division to the Twins), the "non-rental" SP market might essentially boil down to Stroman, who only has 1 year of control left at $10+ mil and has an "over-rated" argument as well.
  9. Otto von Ballpark
    I'm not sure who you count as "under contract" but we have team control on 2 of our current rotation, Berrios and Perez, and of course our current "6th starter" Smeltzer and any other minor leaguers. Also, judging by recent effects of the qualifying offer, I think it's safe to assume we will re-sign one of Gibson or Odorizzi for 2020 and possibly beyond (and possibly both?). (Pineda could probably be retained for something like his 2019 cost too, although it's up for debate whether we should want to.)
  10. Otto von Ballpark
    FWIW, MLBTR just published their top 50 trade candidates: https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2019/06/top-50-trade-candidates-2019-mlb-trade-deadline.html The controllable SP are Stroman (through 2020), Boyd (through 2022), Duffy (through 2021), and Samardzija (through 2020). Boyd stands out, but the others, given their salaries and somewhat limited control beyond 2019, I don't see them as a huge step up from rental SP.
  11. Otto von Ballpark
    I could see that as tempting to the Giants, for sure!
  12. Otto von Ballpark
    What if it's rental or nothing, in terms of SP? Also, not all "blue chips" are equal. Graterol was like a #50 overall prospect and that was before his shoulder shutdown.
  13. Otto von Ballpark
    OBP higher than SLG is a good thing for Rooker? I know, his OBP is really good in June, but his ISO is poor for the month. Rooker has a BABIP of .581 in June too. I'd peg Larnach as significantly better in trade value, especially if he goes to AA soon and keeps hitting. Fangraphs has him at 50 FV, versus Rooker's 40+, which feels about right to me. Rooker's not valueless, but he's at a level where I think other clubs would rather acquire other guys, even ones with similar rankings.
  14. Otto von Ballpark
    I think that's the key -- if you really want to acquire those guys, and perhaps soon, then you may have to pay a premium. Graterol with some lingering concern about his shoulder might be a fairly appropriate premium. But, with our lead and looking for potentially better targets (guys controlled beyond 2019), we may not need to get Bumgarner and Smith today.
  15. Otto von Ballpark
    My vibe off Rooker is that he's not going to bring much value in trade. I'd be shocked if he brought a starter like Bumgarner or a reliever like Smith on his own. He's not necessarily a bad player, but his profile is decidedly one that shouldn't require a notable investment of resources for a team to acquire, not even a good rental player.
  16. Otto von Ballpark
    Yeah, best as I can tell, the Yankees are taking on $8 mil cash (although only ~$3 mil for luxury tax purposes). Looking at Cleveland's roster, I'm guessing he would have indirectly displaced Leonys Martin, with Bauers going to a corner OF spot and a corner guy taking over in center (or Bradley Zimmer, whenever he returns)? Based on their 2019 stats to date, that could be about a 2 WAR difference going forward, although ZiPS regresses that to only about 0.8 WAR. Still nothing to sneeze at for a team who is 0.5 games out of the wild card right now. Although they can't feel too confident about actually catching Boston or the 4 AL clubs ahead of them.
  17. Otto von Ballpark
    The only penalty point the Yankees likely care about is the $246 mil threshold -- that's when they not only pay a tax, but their first 2020 draft pick is dropped 10 spots too. The Red Sox had that happen to them this year, although they'd probably say it was worth it given their 2018 results. Looks like Encarnacion only adds about $3.4 mil to the Yankees luxury tax payroll for 2019: https://twitter.com/Joelsherman1/status/1140074291117121537 I find Cot's Contracts to be way better than Spotrac. Cot's has them still about $14 mil under $246 mil, even after Encarnacion, so they should have room to add pitchers like Bumgarner yet in 2019: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1ai3Wo4UVZbUFtEEOnVEUwBgh2H45wwNe4nd6bXPAvRQ/pubhtml After 2019, it's still a little tight, although they'll shed about $40.5 mil in departing free agents too, none of whom look like likely re-signs (primarily Gregorius, Sabathia, Gardner, and Betances). That could mean they are ~$54 mil under the $246 mil threshold, in which case they should be able to fit arb raises for Judge, Sanchez, and Paxton, plus a bigger FA signing if they want (although they haven't been that aggressive on that end of FA lately anyway). Then they'll get another $43 mil off the books from Tanaka and Ellsbury after 2020, and perhaps another $17 mil if Happ's option doesn't vest.
  18. Otto von Ballpark
    So... Brian Duensing?
  19. Otto von Ballpark
    I don't know about Twins forum archives from back then, but Gleeman fully endorsed the Castillo acquisition: https://aarongleeman.com/2005/12/page/4/ Keep in mind, the Twins already had a pretty good bullpen at the time, and filled a pretty big hole on a hopeful contending team (Punto was our primary 2B in 2005, and posted a 68 OPS+). Edit: this Twins email list endorsed it too: https://apple.ease.lsoft.com/scripts/wa-PLUTO.exe?A0=TWINS&s=4225&O=&D=&TOC=&S=b
  20. Otto von Ballpark
    In addition to what Chief said, the move was made by "Trader Jerry" Dipoto in Seattle. No surprise he is continuing to deal aggressively! Too bad they don't have pitching...
  21. Otto von Ballpark
    I don't know about that. Considering 1B defense, it looks as if Cron is actually better than Voit, and the Twins already have an everyday DH in Cruz (as opposed to Stanton for the Yankees, who is also an outfielder).
  22. Otto von Ballpark
    I wouldn't say openly. There were generic rumor rumblings very early in the offseason, but then this: https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2018/12/mets-brass-on-canodiaz-trade-next-steps.html There was also talk of the Mets trying to replace Syndergaard in FA immediately after any deal, which would make a midseason trade especially unlikely.
  23. Otto von Ballpark
    Depends how you define "blue chippers" -- I was thinking elite prospects, or at least top 50. Of those, we might be down to Lewis and Kirilloff and both are facing some challenges right now. In the context of acquiring a long-term impact player, that would be important (although the other guys could be in the package too).
  24. Otto von Ballpark
    Romero is pitching fine in Rochester? 4.88 ERA, 6.21 FIP, 4.52 xFIP. 1.265 WHIP. Only a 23.7% K rate, which is basically IL average (22.7%). His MLB numbers seem largely in line with his AAA numbers so far in 2019.
  25. Otto von Ballpark
    On Encarnacion, keep in mind HR hitters are going to be cheaper than good pitchers in this market. And Encarnacion isn't even viewed as capable of everyday 1B duty, further limiting his market. We could have topped that offer if we wanted, but that has little bearing on our quest for pitching. That said, we should still be able to get quality pitchers with our prospect pool. Depending on how you define "impact" players -- if you focused on longer-term impact guys -- our lack of blue-chippers (and the current health/scuffles of a few of our top blue chippers) might complicate that a bit. But for immediate impact guys, we should have no problem paying the prospect price, I would think.
×
×
  • Create New...