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
    For 4 affordable years of Archer, I am guessing a few teams could part with a corner OF (Kepler), or a backup catcher (Garver), or a back of the rotation option (Mejia), or relievers.
  2. Otto von Ballpark
    But, plenty of clubs have talent of that level and are willing to deal it. So even if Tampa wants that (and I am not yet convinced that they do, at least not enough to have a meaningful effect on the top piece or two), it does not offer a unique advantage for the Twins. Also, I'd drop Kepler from your list as he's just a year away from arbitration. Polanco has used up a full year of service time too. Tampa needs to maximize pre-arb contributions.
  3. Otto von Ballpark
    I wouldn't worry about the quantity right now. If a 4th piece was involved, it could be someone relatively marginal -- it wouldn't be, say, Thorpe or Javier. Seems like a lot of big deals have come together in recent years with 1 elite prospect, 1 good prospect from the next tier (maybe potentially elite but with some obvious concerns), and then a couple filler pieces. I don't see the Rays pursuing something else with Archer (like a non-elite depth deal) or he would have been dealt already. The question for the Twins is, do we have those top 2 pieces, are we willing to give them up, and will the Rays share that evaluation of them? If those 3 things come together, then the rest should work itself out.
  4. Otto von Ballpark
    Actually, the Rays seem to have quite a few young pieces in the middle infield already -- their own top prospect Adames, Arroyo just acquired from the Giants, Robertson... not necessarily future stars but guys who are ready to get long looks in MLB. Gordon has value and could still be a part of a package, but I doubt they would insist on him. A team like Tampa clearly can't afford guys like Darvish or JD Martinez on the open market, so I feel like if they choose to deal him, they would need to use the Archer chip to acquire ace potential or elite position player potential, rather than just more modest upside prospect depth. And Lewis is probably the closest thing the ace/elite status that Twins have in their minor league system.
  5. Otto von Ballpark
    Even so, wouldn't that be more evidence that Boshers would be better off taking a minor league deal with one of the teams that hasn't signed 3 MLB FA relievers this winter? The Twins would seem to be a poor fit for him right now.
  6. Otto von Ballpark
    The reliever market hasn't been slowed this winter, and anyway, Boshers is marginal enough that higher end MLB FA don't really have much of an effect on his market. Boshers would have to settle for a minor league deal regardless, but I'd guess he could still find a club where he'd have a better chance of winning a spring training competition, and/or a club with more interest in eventually taking advantage of his remaining option year.
  7. Otto von Ballpark
    Does that include when runners are on base? I thought previous pitch clock implementations had a different time limit with runners on base too...
  8. Otto von Ballpark
    I think the Cubs would have us beat on that front too.
  9. Otto von Ballpark
    I think you are right: https://www.foxsports.com/mlb/transactions?year=2017&month=2&type=30 A lot of guys do seem to go on the 60-day DL around opening day, though, but that is probably because they have to miss the first 60 days of the season regardless (spring training days don't count toward the 60), and you can't 60-day DL a guy unless your roster is otherwise full, and a lot of roster decisions are due around the end of spring training anyway (i.e. minor league opt outs, players out of options, etc.). But it does seem like the Twins could DL Pineda on Feb. 13 and sign a MLB free agent. Although it seems like it would barely be a consideration if the cost of signing him earlier would only be losing Kinley.
  10. Otto von Ballpark
    Low leverage short reliever? Or trade sweetener?
  11. Otto von Ballpark
    On a technical level, all transactions are separate, of course. But that doesn't mean they're not related. I'd say fringe 40-man guys who have the same position/profile and whose roster status has to be considered within a few weeks of each other in November/December are going to be inextricably related.
  12. Otto von Ballpark
    Kind of. Players with less than 3 years service time who are added to the 40-man roster between August 15th and the Rule 5 draft are called "draft-excluded players" and can't be outrighted off the 40-man roster between the end of the World Series until 20 days before spring training, even if they clear waivers: https://www.thecubreporter.com/book/export/html/3520 So if you want to remove that player from the 40-man roster during that time, you can't keep them in your organization -- they must be lost on waivers, traded, or released. (On an individual level, it doesn't much matter -- a player worthy of Rule 5 consideration would probably get claimed on waivers anyway. But in the absence of such a rule, if a lot of teams did this with 2-3-4 players a year, there probably wouldn't enough roster spots for all of them to get claimed, allowing teams to effectively protect more than 40 guys from Rule 5. Hence the rule, I guess.) Among current Twins, this "draft-excluded" group consists of Curtiss, Gonsalves, Littell, Moya, Slegers, and Thorpe. That's why I was a little worried when we added Slegers (and why I really disliked adding Pat Dean a couple years ago). Of course, we basically locked ourselves into a similar situation by drafting Kinley -- while he can technically be returned at any time, I don't think any Rule 5 pick in the modern era has ever been returned before March, so unless we plan to buck ~20 years of history, he's just as much locked in until March as Burdi or Bard would have been.
  13. Otto von Ballpark
    Yeah, this is definitely good for the Giants. They need some health and bouncebacks, but none are too far in the rearview mirror. Makes absolute sense for them to add Longoria and McCutchen.
  14. Otto von Ballpark
    Sure, but even before Reed, there wasn't much of a spot for Kinley. (And I only used the term "justified" because that was in the comment to which I was replying -- probably too strong / not quite right for this situation, but I think it is still certainly fair to question the Kinley draft.)
  15. Otto von Ballpark
    This is correct -- Boshers was previously outrighted by the Angels in 2014. So if he goes unclaimed on waivers, he could elect free agency. And he might -- he might be able to find a team with a more open competition for a bullpen spot, and with an option remaining, he might stand a decent chance of getting some 40-man roster time somewhere in 2018.
  16. Otto von Ballpark
    A player has to spend at least 20 days on optional assignment in order to actually burn the option year. In 2016, Boshers was only on optional assignment for ~16 days. So he's only used 2 of his 3 (2014 and 2017).
  17. Otto von Ballpark
    But by the same token, was the selection of Kinley justified? It doesn't look there is possibly a 25-man spot to keep him now, and Bard could have taken the 40-man spot and been optioned, or Burdi could have taken it and been DL'ed (opening up a 40-man spot for someone else in late March). As long as we don't throw around terms like "pitchforks" I think that series of moves is still very much worthy of discussion.
  18. Otto von Ballpark
    Keep in mind McCutchen is a shell of his former self too. Below replacement level in 2016, did rebound to 2.5 bWAR in 2017. Probably should be a corner player now? This is his last year under contract too, and it's not clear they could get much of a comp pick for him anymore either. They tried to deal him this past summer so presumably they know the market, not sure if holding onto him for a deadline deal was a good alternative.
  19. Otto von Ballpark
    Yes, he was just added in November.
  20. Otto von Ballpark
    You know, Cole is a free agent in 2 years, has made it clear he is not signing an extension in Pittsburgh, FA compensation rules have been watered down, and Cole just posted a 101 ERA+ (and 4 of his 5 career seasons are within 10% of that mark). That doesn't necessarily mean this is a good trade, but a lot of people seem to judging it on Cole's reputation rather than his on-field contributions. And ignoring the fact that Pittsburgh was running out of time to hope those two things came into better alignment in a meaningful way.
  21. Otto von Ballpark
    Sure, if you really think he's a league average starter for the next 6 years. But 21 starts (at less than 5 IP each) of league average ERA isn't really strong evidence of that. I wouldn't say he's valueless, of course, but keep in mind not much has changed about him or his profile/performance since he was traded straight up for Eduardo Nunez a year ago. That was a good trade for the Twins, but I'm not seeing much to suggest he could carry much value in a major trade right now.
  22. Otto von Ballpark
    It's important to keep in mind that the list of teams "in" on Darvish isn't anything official or limiting. As those teams drop out or if his market truly doesn't develop, Darvish will expand his considerations. It's doubtful he will be stuck deciding between just 2 teams if his market only develops to 5/125 or whatever.
  23. Otto von Ballpark
    Not sure if those are great comparables, or at least the mix is off. I like Kepler, but he is a corner outfielder who has been stuck on 96 OPS+ thus far in MLB, and he is only a year away from arbitration. Duffey is likewise close to arb, and started out well as a SP and then as a RP, but faded in both roles as one might expect given his modest pedigree. He is also 27 years old and threw only 71 innings last year, so a quick return to starting is doubtful. Mejia could be useful, but has almost zero upside potential either as a starter or reliever. The Astros guys are not elite, of course, but there is definitely a different mix that could be preferable. Musgrove hasn't yet faltered as a reliever and could easily make another attempt at starting right away (he threw 122 IP in 2018). Feliz has struggled overall, but 13 K/9 in MLB suggests he has some tools. Moran has 136 and 133 wRC+ marks in 2 of his last 3 minor league seasons, covering AA/AAA, and plays 3B. And only Feliz is as close to arb as Kepler/Duffey.
  24. Otto von Ballpark
    I don't think this survey is evidence of diminishing interest overall. Yes, it is the #1 favorite sport among fewer people now, but if more attention is paid to sports overall (a likely proposition), baseball likely garners equal or greater attention as someone's #2 or even #3 today than it could have among many "#1 fans" from years ago. Put another way, seeing a distribution of #1 favorite sports tells us very little -- I'd say, next to nothing -- about overall interest levels, given the abundance of extra factors and how those factors have changed dramatically over time.
  25. Otto von Ballpark
    To remove any doubt about Moya's security, because he was added between August 15th and the Rule 5 draft (with less than 3 years service time), he is classified as a Rule 5 "draft-excluded player" and can't be passed through waivers to be sent outright to the minors until mid-March at the earliest: https://www.thecubreporter.com/book/export/html/3517 So the only way Moya could be removed from our 40-man at this point would be trade or release. Slegers and Curtiss are in the same situation. I'd guess they try to put Boshers through waivers and outright him. Could try it with Enns too, as unlike Moya, Enns was added before August 15. Although it does seem like there can't be possibly be a spot for Kinley anymore either...
×
×
  • Create New...