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
    If he's like me, it's on his ever-growing to-do list. And it will soon become a New Year's resolution, maybe spanning multiple years.
  2. Otto von Ballpark
    Well, that's generally part of lighting the fire under a player, by definition. I hope they're not doing that to their best performers!
  3. Otto von Ballpark
    I mean, sending a guy home seems like a rare motivational tactic. They did with Dozier and Hicks, but they were rookies and both were just demoted to AAA in August and hit poorly there. Dozier was about to change positions too. I get that Buxton has been frustrating, but the circumstances around sending him home Sep. 1st feel quite a bit different. (Both Dozier and Hicks struggled to open the following season too, if we want to judge the efficacy of those decision.)
  4. Otto von Ballpark
    Obviously Buxton is streaky, but judging by "months" is a bit problematic. Calendar months are rather arbitrary, and do you require a minimum PA threshold? Do two bad half-months outweigh a great full month? He didn't even play a full month in MLB in 2018, so how do you judge that? His full 2018 season was about 1 month worth of PAs. So maybe -1 bad month for the season? In 2017, he was pretty even -- awful in 2 months covering 171 PA, great in 2 months covering 151 PA, and roughly average in 2 more months covering 189 PA. Feels like 2017 should be +1 in this "monthly" accounting, or at worst neutral. 2016, he really only played 2 full months, and was bad in one and great in the other. Another 2 half-months were poor, so I guess -1 bad "month" again? 2015 might be right out -- it was poor, but basically just 3 half-months (or less) in his MLB debut year. Didn't even break the rookie AB threshold for the entire season. So maybe 1-2 more awful "months" vs average or better "months" for 2016-2018 (and a little worse if you include his abbreviated 2015 debut). How meaningful is that, versus just citing that he's been a streaky 80 wRC+ overall (with plus CF defense) since the start of 2016?
  5. Otto von Ballpark
    The Brewers used Schoop to fill in a bit at SS down the stretch this year. I don't know if he was any good, but I think that kind of flexibility might be what Brian is referring to. (Plus a willingness to use the DL and AAA guys when appropriate.)
  6. Otto von Ballpark
    That's how I viewed the July 2nd option/demotion -- light a fire in the player, and let him get ample rest while trying to get healthy and back in the groove at AAA (which may not have been feasible on the MLB roster at the time, with a 3-4 man bench). But once Sept. 1st rolls around, and rosters expand, while he's playing and hitting well at AAA, those reasons kind of go out the window, no? You can tell him he has to earn his starting job back, fine, you can even call up guys to compete with him (and sign more such guys in the offseason) -- but sending him home at that point is more like artificially handicapping him in that goal too.
  7. Otto von Ballpark
    As far as I remember, Buxton had permission from the team to go home early from Rochester.
  8. Otto von Ballpark
    So how does sending him home for a month help toward this goal? You could have parked him on the bench in Minnesota if you wanted him to work with coaches but not get exposed in MLB games right away again.
  9. Otto von Ballpark
    So was it impossible for him to earn a callup? Unless you expected him to teach opposing AAA pitchers to throw better breaking balls, what was he supposed to do other than feast on their fastballs? Also, as bad as he looked at the plate in MLB in 2018, keep in mind it was only 94 PA (and half that was playing through a toe injury). How much do you want to punish a guy for performance reasons based on that tiny sample? I could possibly see benching a guy or sending him to the minors after 94 really bad PA -- clear his head, correct bad habits -- but the Twins went further than that in September: they sent him home. No working on things in the minors, no sitting on the bench and working with coaches and teammates, just sent him home.
  10. Otto von Ballpark
    No, Buxton has 1 option year left. Only 2016 and 2018 have been option years for him so far. (He was optioned briefly in 2015 too, but spent less than 20 days on optional assignment so he didn't "burn" the year.)
  11. Otto von Ballpark
    It was obviously a rough year, but this accounting isn't quite fair. Buxton "missing" September (final ~28 games) was the Twins decision. Regardless of how you feel about the decision, you can't really cite Buxton "missing" September itself as a failing (on top of any pre-September failings), and certainly you can't use the "missed" September games as part of a justification for the September decision itself. Not that 56 games played would be a huge improvement, although there's also some pre-September questions too (mainly, how much of a role did the Twins have in rushing him back from the initial toe injury).
  12. Otto von Ballpark
    FYI, oWAR includes the positional adjustment, so it is heavily penalizing Cruz for being a DH. If you really want to compare just hitting, use Rbat at B-Ref, where Cruz's 22 in 2018 dwarfs anything on the Twins (Escobar led with 11, Rosario had 6). Or better yet, a rate stat rather than a counting stat -- Cruz had a 135 OPS+ versus Escobar's 127 or Rosario's 115.
  13. Otto von Ballpark
    Overshadowed by Jeffress, but Soria was pretty poor for the Brewers in the NLCS...
  14. Otto von Ballpark
    It's not easy to add long term talent outside of the draft and "sell" trades, but I agree I would like to eventually see some results in that regard with this front office. If you have a bad division, doesn't that mean you don't have to be as aggressive, in a way? I might regret saying this, but Cleveland seems like our only real threat in 2019. If they falter at all, we're in pretty good position, even with our modest/conservative approach (like we almost were at points in 2018). As opposed to, say, the AL East or NL Central, where there have generally been multiple teams ready to prevail should one top dog falter. Obviously we can still seek upgrades and try to close the gap with Cleveland, but maybe it's not such an immediate need to pay Corbin 6/130 right now, or offer Romero in trade for Goldschmidt, etc.
  15. Otto von Ballpark
    Actually 6th in the AL in scoring -- and a distant 6th (5th to 6th was the biggest gap between any two spots) -- and only 10th in wRC+ which suggests maybe we were lucky to score that many? 10th in BaseRuns too. Cave may have arguably been second best, but he was only a 108 wRC+ hitter with a .363 BABIP. Steamer projects him at 88 wRC+ for 2019. Don't think his inclusion would move the analysis needle too much.
  16. Otto von Ballpark
    FWIW, even with a loss tonight, we'd still hold the #6 seed and thus "control our own destiny". Our tie gives us the advantage over the three other 6-win teams. Obviously it would be better to win tonight, move up to #5 ahead of the Seahawks, have a bit of a cushion, and keep the division title a possibility. (A loss tonight would mean the next Bears win would clinch the division for them.)
  17. Otto von Ballpark
    I said an 80-85 win forecast, not that 80-85 would win the division. A team with an 80-85 win forecast might win 90 (they may also lose 90 ), but perhaps more importantly, they may find themselves in the right circumstances midseason to make some moves. Point being, there's value in staying in that forecast range even when you're working toward longer-term goals. There are only 6 teams in all of MLB who project to 90+ wins for 2019 right now, per Fangraphs. That's elite territory. Obviously we all want the Twins to get into that group too, but it's virtually impossible to move from 80 to 90 on paper in one offseason. If they've got a plan for 90 wins in 2021, and can keep us in 80-85 in the meantime, that's not bad -- although I echo the sentiments of others here that such a 2021 plan might not be achievable without some longer-range talent additions that just these 1-2 year MLB moves (plus the draft and deadline deals).
  18. Otto von Ballpark
    How many super teams have we ever seen in the AL Central? Chicago and Detroit have only reached 95 wins twice each in the history of the AL Central. Cleveland 4 times, but only 2 since 1997. KC, never. Twins, once (although twice more at 94). I get that Chicago and others won't be awful forever, but I don't think there is a serious risk of falling behind a "super team" in the AL Central. An 80-85 win forecast should be enough to keep us in the mix most every year. Not that we should limit ourselves to that, but it's not necessarily bad to have a few years like that while hopefully building toward something better.
  19. Otto von Ballpark
    A 52 wRC+, over 410 PA, can almost certainly be universally characterized as "awful". Obviously, it would be worse if he was older or repeating a level or playing a corner position, but it's still awful.
  20. Otto von Ballpark
    Nitpick, but that seems a touch high. Using MLBTR's arbitration estimates, that trio clocks in at $25.3 mil for 2019.
  21. Otto von Ballpark
    FYI, it should be as simple as opening the link in an incognito window/tab in your browser.
  22. Otto von Ballpark
    Thanks for sharing, I hadn't seen that. (Although I had heard earlier speculation.) I wonder how true it is, or how much Levine might simply be embracing an excuse that's a bit of a deflection of his own responsibilities. (Obviously he assembled the roster, but saying they struggled because of chemistry is a bit gentler than other GM job analysis.) Also, FWIW, only Lynn and Duke were acquired as strictly one-year "mercenaries" last winter. Odorizzi had 2 years control through arb, Reed a 2 year guarantee, and Morrison and Rodney 2 years through team options. And as far as current players who were "mercenaries" on expiring contracts, it was only Dozier, Escobar, and Mauer. (Erv had a team option too.) I doubt Mauer could be considered "mercenary" in any context, and by all accounts Escobar was beloved and offered an extension. So this "mercenary" line of thinking seems like a convenient way of laying outsized blame on primarily two guys, Lynn and Dozier, when they're already out the door. Neither was great for the Twins in 2018, but this probably exaggerates their roles in our scuffles. Edit to add: And of course, this offseason so far, they have added a 2 year guy in Cron and another 1 year mercenary in Schoop. And I guess by the earlier definition, Reed and Odorizzi join the expiring contract "mercenary" club, along with Gibson and Castro.
  23. Otto von Ballpark
    Would Cron be the most expensive arbitration termination pay case ever? Emilio Bonifacio got $574k, which was 30 days termination pay on his $3.5 mil contract because the Royals cut him before March 15. That would be equivalent to $787k on Cron's $4.8 mil contract. But if the Twins waited until after March 15, presumably necessary for "Rooker/Austin/etc. to force the move" via spring performance, it would be 45 days termination pay, or $1.18 mil. And that's only if he's cut in spring training, and never sees a day on the regular season roster. Once opening day hits, the salary is 100% guaranteed.
  24. Otto von Ballpark
    Convincing Greinke to waive his no-trade clause, for starters...
  25. Otto von Ballpark
    Weaver and Kelly were very recent top 50 prospects. Gordon is the only one in your hypothetical package with a comparable pedigree, and Arizona is apparently set at the moment for middle infielders. Nothing against Garver and Mejia, but they have to be viewed as having lower ceilings than Kelly and Weaver right now. (Not to mention, Mejia's season ended early due to elbow issues.) And ceiling is generally what teams are targeting in these kinds of trades for prospects/young players.
×
×
  • Create New...