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
    They are very different injury cases. Granite was bothered by an injury during spring training, spent over 3 weeks on the DL, and still isn't hitting well. That has definitely complicated any 2018 promotion plans for him. But Wade was fully healthy this spring, and healthy and hitting well into mid-May. He didn't get hurt until he collided with a wall on May 19. Given the Twins still hadn't even promoted him to AAA by that point, even while repeating AA with improved power etc., there really isn't a case that the injury has seriously impacted their promotion plans for him this year.
  2. Otto von Ballpark
    Are you saying that promoting Wade now is a comparably extreme opinion as calling for him to be DFA'd after a slump? Otherwise, I'm not sure how relevant this statement is.
  3. Otto von Ballpark
    Rosario and Kepler aren't going to sit against LHP, and they've actually been solid against LHP this season anyway. So I think you could still afford to run Wade out there too (I'm not so sure about Granite).
  4. Otto von Ballpark
    Not sure Grossman's 2017 was anything special for a 4th OF. He was a league-average bat with terrible defense, that's basically replacement level. In 2016 his bat was probably good enough to offset the bad defense (although metrics don't necessarily agree), but it sure seems like 2016 might be the outlier offensive performance of his career. Also, I don't think they would have to "jettison" Grossman. First of all, they could swap a guy in for LaMarre first, but even if they wanted to swap out Grossman too, he hasn't been worth his $2 mil salary, so it's quite possible he clears waivers. And he can't refuse an outright assignment. So we could keep him around in Rochester, in case of another injury, Wade struggling, etc.
  5. Otto von Ballpark
    That rehab assignment rule does not differentiate between DL lengths, though...
  6. Otto von Ballpark
    "Solid" is obviously subjective (did Tampa feel Palacios was a "solid" return?), but keep in mind, interest in both Lynn and Odorizzi was pretty tepid this past winter. If they are healthy and pitching well, maybe in the ballpark of the Jaime Garcia trades?
  7. Otto von Ballpark
    bWAR agrees with you. Since the start of 2014, they have Solarte at 7.5 bWAR in 2289 PA, and Escobar at 4.1 bWAR in 1993 PA. Although most of that difference is probably due to 2016, when Escobar was at -0.7 bWAR. Solarte's lowest full season bWAR so far is only 1.3.
  8. Otto von Ballpark
    A boatload, for 1.5 years of Gibson? A guy who is pushing 31 years old, with a career 90 ERA+? I think you might be overrating the trade value of his last 11 starts of 118 ERA+. Maybe we could get a Palacios type for him now. Likewise, I don't think the trade value needle has moved too much on Odorizzi since we got him for Palacios. I guess he may be answering questions about any lingering back issues, but he still has a 5.05 FIP this year, and a few months less team control than he did before. Return comparable to Palacios again?
  9. Otto von Ballpark
    So from the Buxton thread: I looked it up, and it appears to apply to a recurrence of the same injury too: https://www.thecubreporter.com/book/export/html/3538 "With approval of the MLB Commissioner, if a player incurs a new (different) injury or illness or suffers a recurrence of the previous injury or illness while on a Minor League Rehab Assignment, the player must be recalled from his Rehab Assignment and remain inactive for at least five days (for position players) or seven days (for pitchers) before starting another Minor League Rehab Assignment." So are we going to have to activate Ervin for a week on June 22 regardless of his health status? He started his rehab on May 23.
  10. Otto von Ballpark
    To be fair, 4 of those were extra inning road games, where by definition all losses will be walk-off losses.
  11. Otto von Ballpark
    I didn't mean to jump the gun, of course. May's standard rehab can run through June 10
  12. Otto von Ballpark
    Just noticed this: https://www.thecubreporter.com/book/export/html/3538 "With approval of the MLB Commissioner, a player who has undergone elbow UCL reconstruction surgery (so-called "Tommy John Surgery") may have his Minor League Rehab Assignment renewed for up to 30 additional days (in the form of three ten-day renewals)." So perhaps we could get more rehab time for May.
  13. Otto von Ballpark
    It's not really any more work later. Heck, maybe they can activate May and put Castro on the 60-day DL in a single fax! Could be showing your hand too. If you 60-day DL Castro now, and your roster sits at 39, maybe it looks like you're more willing to claim a guy off waivers in the meantime and another team might be less likely to try sneaking someone through? As opposed to, if you leave your roster at 40, other teams might just assume Castro is holding a spot for Trevor May. Not a significant advantage at all, everyone and his dog knows that Castro could go on the 60-day DL at any time, but in a sport where batters believe they gain control by adjusting their batting gloves between every pitch, it doesn't have to be a significant advantage to convince someone to do it!
  14. Otto von Ballpark
    Maybe there is a Cone-Rivera joke I am missing, but Rivera was an international signing from Panama.
  15. Otto von Ballpark
    I'm afraid I don't follow. The Twins drafted Blayne Enlow at #76 last year. They likely would have drafted Enlow at #74 too, if they had that pick. I wouldn't eliminate him from the analysis when projecting the potential value of our #74 spot this year. Of course, expanding the sample means expanding the denominator too. So if you found 3 good players at #74 from the last X drafts, and 6 at #75 during that same time, you could estimate that as (3+6) / (X * 2). Evaluating the last 15 years of picks 74-76, for example, would give you a sample equal to 45 years of just pick 74. And it would probably be a more relevant sample too, given the changes in the game. (Of course there are limits. A 10th round pick that blossoms into a star shouldn't factor into the analysis at #74. Or even a 5th round pick.)
  16. Otto von Ballpark
    What is the benefit of putting him on the 60-day DL before you need the spot? It is not like there is a processing delay, they can 60-day DL immediately when the need arises. I know you can't put a player on the 60-day DL unless the 40-man roster is otherwise full. I think that is the only applicable retriction here. (Also, after August 31, a player placed on the 60-day DL must be replaced immediately.) https://www.thecubreporter.com/book/export/html/3538 I guess it could come up if, say, a pitcher got hurt tomorrow, and insurance would kick in if the pitcher went on the 60-day DL. But if the Twins already had Castro on the 60-day DL, and the roster was no longer full at 39, they couldn't 60-day DL the pitcher unless they added someone else to roster first, which they may not be prepared to do. (I suppose they could add some random guy just to take a spot for a while.) I don't know if that is a reason, but in any case, teams don't seem to use the 60-day DL unless they have a corresponding transaction ready.
  17. Otto von Ballpark
    FYI, the DFA period has been shortened from 10 days to 7 days. Also, they could have already been planning to sell this pick, and just used the Hughes DFA to solicit the best & final offers. We don't know if they were ever expecting to eat the full salary and hold on to the pick.
  18. Otto von Ballpark
    We will see how much they actually spend, that should address most of it. If they only spend $90 mil next year, we will know this $7 mil really didn't matter in any meaningful way. They pretty much have to repeat this year's spending next year, or add ~$7 mil during this season, to justify this deal. (Barring Villalobos becoming a legit prospect, of course.)
  19. Otto von Ballpark
    Sure, that is fine. I just don't think you can dismiss #74 picks because there hasn't been a star taken there since, say, David Cone in 1981. When there have been stars taken with picks shortly thereafter. Not that it changes things too much, but by that point in the draft, you probably want to look at ranges, and expand the sample size.
  20. Otto von Ballpark
    More good points! If we planned to draft and sign the Gophers bullpen catcher at #74, we could apply the bonus to our #20 pick and make its bonus equivalent to the #14 pick. Or our #59 pick could be upgraded to the #37 slot. Now the draft is next week already, so the Twins probably have some idea how it is going to shake out. But there are so many moving pieces, it is hard to take an option off the table. And another example trade-wise, #74 pick Daniel Norris may not pan out as a long-term productive MLB player, but he was already used to acquire David Price at the deadline, pushing the Blue Jays to the postseason and deep into the ALCS that year. If the Jays had sold the pick in 2011, maybe they don't have the pieces to make that happen in 2015.
  21. Otto von Ballpark
    Good point. Looking strictly at #74 picks isn't quite right. It's not like there is a league-wide locked in ranking and we can only get the 74th ranked guy. We might get the guy ranked #40 on our board. The team picking at #100 might make the same selection at #74. (A minute of research shows Giancarlo Stanton was the #76 overall pick.) That's not to say it changes the calculus too much, but it's worth noting that while the average return on the #74 pick is fairly low, it is still an exclusive lotto ticket that we are forgoing for cash.
  22. Otto von Ballpark
    Last year, they were just overshadowed roundly by Bartolo Colon.
  23. Otto von Ballpark
    I think the implication is that this money isn't necessarily being cleared to be spent. Not that anyone is an idiot.
  24. Otto von Ballpark
    Escobar's peak wRC+ coming into the season was 101 (and I think his 2018 mark is trending down toward that too, already down to 115).
  25. Otto von Ballpark
    Twins had the 24th bonus pool before the trade, this moves them down to 26th. A bit behind our first round draft position of 20th. The Padres pool moved up from 8th to 7th, to match their first round position (7th).
×
×
  • Create New...