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
    He wouldn't even have had to repeat 2014 to be tradeable for a decent return on that contract. But once we extended him, Hughes pretty much became untradeable unless he repeated 2014.
  2. Otto von Ballpark
    But -- who cares? It seems like we were all so excited to get the guy for 5/58 rather than 5/80 or whatever if we waited another year or two, we lost sight of how incredibly valuable he was at 2/16. It wouldn't take much for his 2/16 contract to generate equivalent excess value as the 5/58 deal over the 5/80, and with a lot less risk and a lot more flexibility.
  3. Otto von Ballpark
    Teams rarely trade for long-term contracts in July, and probably not at the Dozier/Ervin Santana level of player, even if they are not bad players. I am sure some team(s) will have interest in Plouffe and his shorter-term guarantee, but not necessarily at any price the Twins would want to accept. If the prospect is closer to Jason Adam / Alex Presley than to a top 100 guy, should the Twins do that? And is that level of return going to be affected if Plouffe sits a bit more over the next couple months for Polanco and Sano?
  4. Otto von Ballpark
    I remember endorsing the Hughes extension when it happened, but I'll admit, even without hindsight and in the context of his 2014 season, I was probably wrong. Hughes was on an incredible contract, 2/16 remaining for ages 29-30. We already had Nolasco and Ervin Santana signed for more money and longer terms. Even if you liked Hughes' recent performance and age more than Nolasco and Santana, it was probably foolish to forego the massive benefits of that below market contract and extend Hughes above and beyond the other pitchers. It kinda limited out options. Of course, it's not a franchise-sinking amount of money, as long as we don't let it. There's no reason it can't go to the pen, or fall behind a younger pitcher on the rotation depth chart, or eventually even be dumped like we considered with Nolasco recently. I'm not sure the Twins will do that, of course, and I don't know if it's the salary driving that, or their veteran preference driving that and the salary, but that's probably a separate problem than the Hughes extension on its own.
  5. Otto von Ballpark
    We all know that teams make deals in July. But what's the likely return for mediocre veterans? Find me a guy (and contract) in the class of Hughes, Santana, Nolasco, Plouffe, Dozier, Nunez, etc. who fetched a meaningful return in July. And even if they fetch something modest -- how much does that modest return have to do with their playing time in June & July? The above names are all very much veteran known quantities -- we can't exactly predict their performance, but we know the range pretty well. And they're mostly controlled for multiple years, so short-term streaks are much less meaningful to their July trade value. Put simply: guys like Hughes, Santana, Nolasco, Plouffe, Dozier, Nunez, etc. aren't going to fetch a top 100 prospect in July, and they're not going to fetch a meaningfully different class of prospect due to their playing time and likely performance range in the 2 months leading up to the deadline either. Similarly, especially for those starting pitchers, teams aren't going to pick up 100% of their salary in July, and they're not going to pick up a meaningfully larger portion of their salary due to their playing time in the 2 months leading up to the leading either.
  6. Otto von Ballpark
    Apparently, yes. 24.9 K/9. And I thought his start at AA was pretty good --- 9 K's in 5 perfect innings to start the year. Looked much more mortal over his next 6 games, but his results at AAA suggest he was still worthy of promotion. If he continues pitching well, I think he could/should be up around June 1st.
  7. Otto von Ballpark
    Seth, it should probably be noted that since that report, Rochester has announced starters through Saturday and Meyer isn't among them. Berrios is rejoining the team too and would be in line to start Sunday, before an off day Monday. Unless he works out of the pen, Meyer is unlikely to appear before Tuesday May 24 at the earliest. According to this report, Meyer was supposed to throw sometime over the past couple days with an eye toward returning sooner: http://www.democratandchronicle.com/story/sports/baseball/blogs/extra-bases/2016/05/16/meyer-should-rejoin-wings-rotation-trip-south/84449392/ I wonder if he's still having shoulder problems?
  8. Otto von Ballpark
    Yeah, I am not sure what a complete "shut down" would accomplish. Hughes has been effectively "shut down" for 4+ months each of the last two offseasons. As long as he can still pitch, but he's just getting less velocity and getting fatigued faster, it's probably best for him to try learning how to pitch through it. Perhaps out of the pen.
  9. Otto von Ballpark
    If the alternative is playing Polanco once a week, sure send him to AAA. Is that the only alternative, though? Couldn't your plan just as simply say, Polanco should start most days at SS while Escobar is out, and spell Dozier or Plouffe once or twice a week too? If you are sending down Rosario anyway, it should be pretty easy for Nunez to pick up at-bats in the outfield. I don't know why Polanco, who has looked pretty good, is getting lumped in with Rosario, who hasn't. I may not call Kepler up right now, but I don't know why Max, who started 2 games in 2 weeks (after 2 career games at AAA), is getting lumped in with Buxton already. And I'm not sure why Meyer's 1 start earned him the same banishment as Berrios' four starts. Or why your "plan" seems to omit Trevor May entirely -- wouldn't starting him over the next two month be instructive for planning our future, especially if you want to call up a bunch of other starters in August? I swear I've read you time and again saying how prospects are all different and can't be treated the same, yet you create a "plan" that very explicitly does just that.
  10. Otto von Ballpark
    Sounds nice in theory, but Polanco -- what has he done to deserve to be buried at AAA until August 1st? Which of Meyer's 4 innings convinced you he wasn't ready? Which of Kepler's 2 starts did the same? I'm all for demoting a prospect who looks overmatched, like Buxton and others, but you and Seth are applying blanket rules to everybody. It's not a cookie-cutter process. If we have a rotation opening for the next 3 weeks, there is probably a more useful way to fill it than Pat Dean. If not Berrios, then perhaps Trevor May? If Escobar is on the DL, you should be able to find some significant at-bats for Polanco. If you don't see Meyer as a starting pitcher, is there a place where you can work with him in our MLB bullpen?
  11. Otto von Ballpark
    Arcia and Escobar, sure, maybe Danny Santana and a couple relievers, but the veteran starting pitchers? Plouffe? Dozier? Jepsen? Suzuki? Nunez? Mastroianni? Pat Dean? Almost nothing those guys do in the next two months will have any affect on their July trade value or long-term projections/expectations. In fact, cromulent performances by those guys are more likely to buy more playing time in August, September, and beyond than they are to help us make a final decision on them by August 1st. Will August and September be enough time to collect useful data on the new young players in advance of 2017? Many of those veterans would be August waiver trade candidates too. Should we push it back to September 1st if necessary? Will September be enough to evaluate anybody? Parmelee, Pinto...
  12. Otto von Ballpark
    "Hope they turn things around and maybe they can be traded in July." How much realistic benefit is that? It is incredibly unlikely that they will turn things around to anything meaningful. Fangraphs "coin flip mode" -- putting aside all of their projections and depth charts and everything, just flipping a coin 50/50 for the results of each remaining game, largely neutralizing the difference between good teams and bad -- gives them a 2.5% chance of making the postseason, far lower than anyone in baseball save the Braves (whose division mates currently have better records). They're not going to get any good return on trading these guys in July. Hughes, Santana, and Nolasco all have future years and millions on their contracts -- how often do those guys get dealt in July? Cole Hamels did, but he was an ace. (And even then, the Phillies had to include a big K reliever in Jake Diekman, eat Matt Harrison's contract in return, etc.) Dozier and his contract and recent track record are more of the same. Plouffe? You saw the market for third baseman last winter, it's unlikely to get better in July for a player of Plouffe's caliber. Arcia as he's about to hit arbitration, utility man Nunez, struggling Suzuki and Jepsen... these guys will not bring a meaningful trade return. Best case, TR reprises Doumit-for-Gilmartin and gets another fringe guy who will need 40 man protection soon. Worst case, this bunch does just enough through July to not boost their trade value, but "earn" additional playing time in August and September contrary to the other part of your plan. Do you really think the Twins will suddenly cut/trade/bench a pile of veterans on August 1st? Or even if they would, that somehow doing that would be a better strategy than working young players in where appropriate right now?
  13. Otto von Ballpark
    Buxton had 113 days service time entering the season, and got about 22 more before his demotion. So, roughly 135 days. A full season of service time is defined as 172 days. So we would have to keep him under ~37 days on the MLB roster for the rest of this season in order to gain an extra year of team control (assuming he isn't demoted much in 2017 or beyond). So if we want him to finish the season up here in September, we pretty much couldn't call him up before August 27th or so if we want that extra year of control. It might be difficult to keep him down that long. At his present level of 135 days service, he's right around the threshold for Super 2 status, meaning even if doesn't spend another day in MLB this year, he may be eligible for the first of 4 arbitration awards after the 2018 season.
  14. Otto von Ballpark
    The Twins obviously didn't care about what kind of groove Meyer was in for his first start, so why should they now? I guess I could give him one more Rochester tune-up, but if he's healthy enough to pitch, there's pretty much nothing that he or Hughes could do in one start that would change my mind about who should take the next turn.
  15. Otto von Ballpark
    Yes, but he had some shoulder fatigue in a bullpen session, so he has yet to appear in a game for them. He's expected to start some time this week, though (their probable starters are all TBD beginning Tuesday). Personally, barring a return to the rotation for Trevor May, I'd love to see Meyer start in place of Hughes tomorrow night. Hughes would probably be more useful out of the pen than Pat Dean too.
  16. Otto von Ballpark
    Add the journeymen. It appears there is no shortage of guys on the 40-man the Twins are willing to cut loose (and they haven't even touched perhaps the most likely drop candidate, the uber-blocked, struggling, and nearly out of options Vargas).
  17. Otto von Ballpark
    You can do so yourself quite easily here: http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/MIN/ So far, the 2014-2016 Twins pitching staffs have each been older than any Twins staffs since 2003 (Rogers and Reed) and 1988 (Blyleven, with a dash of Niekro and Carlton). Our position players are indeed younger than the 1996-1998 teams, but older than the 1999-2003 squads.
  18. Otto von Ballpark
    The Royals would probably have the inside track, if they are willing to include this key piece: http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/d/duensbr01.shtml
  19. Otto von Ballpark
    How well did surrounding himself with the right people help Bill Smith?
  20. Otto von Ballpark
    Why should Jay be on an innings limit? A full season starting at high-A should only be about 130 innings. He threw 85 last year between college and the pros. Tyler Duffey went from 70 to 120 a few years ago. Berrios (103) and Stewart (87) wound up with lower innings counts in their first full seasons, but they were both 19 year old high school draftees who each missed a handful of starts those years. If he's pitching well, there should be no reason to mess with Jay to limit his innings. The shorter season and 6 man rotation are already enough to do that.
  21. Otto von Ballpark
    Agreed. Although it's also pretty much the same line he posted at AA and AAA last year. It's good to see that his rough MLB start hasn't affected his minor league hitting, but it remains to be seen if he's ready to adjust to the bigs. Hopefully it was just the leg kick messing him up this year -- his MLB numbers last year were bad, but not hopeless. Getting back to that could be something to build on.
  22. Otto von Ballpark
    How did you do it, if you don't mind me asking?
  23. Otto von Ballpark
    When did Buxton add the leg kick? According to Parker it was this spring: https://twitter.com/parkerhageman/status/712332871860494336
  24. Otto von Ballpark
    The FSL as a whole is hitting .241/.314/.344 (.657), and averaging 29 K and 12 BB per 32.2 IP. The teams that Jay has faced are collectively hitting even worse than that, ranking 6th, 8th, 9th, and 11th out of 12 in raw OPS.
  25. Otto von Ballpark
    There's more to Antony's public record than his brief stint as acting GM. He was also on record in 2010 as believing RBIs were more predictive than slugging percentage. This was after 12 years as our director of baseball operations, and 3 years as our assistant GM. Now, if it was some baseball lifer who made that statement, who had a track record of solid moves like TR, I'd give him some benefit of the doubt. But as assistant GM under Bill Smith, Antony probably deserves some blame for our poor higher-level moves from 2007-2011 (MLB moves like Delmon, the second Hardy trade, etc. were almost certainly made at the top rather than by our lower level scouts and directors). I am sure he's a great guy, well respected, and can do a job in the front office just fine -- but he is almost certainly not the guy you want heading the baseball side of the organization.
×
×
  • Create New...