Jump to content
The Twins open a weekend set with the Rays! Come join our game thread! ×
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
    Obviously Junis isn't a particularly good pitcher, but that HR rate doesn't seem that bad for 2019. AL SP as a whole gave up 1.52 HR/9 in 2019 (would be curious about the effect of openers?), while Junis was at 1.59. Junis allowed 31 HR in 175.1 IP for the season; the average AL SP would have allowed 29.6 in the same number of innings. The difference is even closer if we look at batters faced rather than innings pitched, because Junis faced more batters per inning than the average starter (due to worse than average opponent's batting average / WHIP). The average AL SP would have surrendered 30.3 HR facing the same number of batters as Junis in 2019. Of course, that ignores park factors -- ESPN lists Kaufman Stadium as below-average in HR park factor every year of Junis's career. Although looking at Junis specifically, the difference between his career home and road HR rates may only equal about 1 HR per season. And there it is! More words than I ever thought I'd write about Jakob Junis.
  2. Otto von Ballpark
    I don't mean to offend the signatories, but why are they so concerned about 2020 when they've already dismissed strike years? One of their grandkids should show them how anyone using a Google phone the past 38 years has seen 1981 as rock-bottom for Twins attendance -- not only total attendance, but also lower per-game attendance than 1974. And with no visible asterisk at Baseball-Reference. And actually, Baseball Reference is listing 2020 attendance so far as blank, not zero, so anyone using a Google phone right now to sort attendance won't see it as worse than 1974 or 1981 either: https://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/MIN/attend.shtml#franchise_years::7 I suppose that could change if they start allowing a small number of fans into games in 2020...
  3. Otto von Ballpark
    Generally correct, although the extension was 3 years, $20.4 mil. And that includes his $2.9 mil arbitration salary for his last year of team control in 2019, which would have been mighty attractive given Pressly's performance (especially if you consider the knee injury a fluke which may not have happened under different circumstances). Technically he could have signed some kind of extension with Minnesota too, but I doubt it -- I don't think he was eager to commit here, and I don't think the Twins would have been eager to hand him $17.5 mil for 2020-2021 (plus a 2022 option which could have become guaranteed at $10 mil).
  4. Otto von Ballpark
    Without an extension, Pressly would have been a free agent last winter. And as a native Texan who had yet to sign more than a 1-year deal with the Twins, it's quite possible he was more willing to sign that extension with Houston than he would have been with Minnesota. My first thought was that having Pressly in 2019 meant we wouldn't have traded for Romo at the deadline, because Romo was a rental and Dyson had an extra year of control. (We could have still signed Romo in the offseason so the 2020 team would have been much the same.) But then I remembered how we comfortably acquired Romo a few days before the deadline, and only managed to get Dyson right up against the deadline. So maybe it's more likely we would have passed on Dyson because he was a more difficult acquisition, despite the extra year of control? Still may not have changed the 2020 team much, but maybe worth keeping an eye on the prospects exchanged in those two deals.
  5. Otto von Ballpark
    Worth noting that Pressly’s injury and subsequent struggles late in 2019 was a fluke event caused by a batted ball off his knee. It may be appropriate to discount that injury and its effects in this evaluation. (His 2020 injuries so far might be fair game, although he may have left the alternate reality Twins as a free agent last offseason too.) That said, while the above may improve the Pressly side of the ledger, the Twins assembled a very good bullpen pretty quickly after his departure, so even a quality Pressly may have been superfluous. Although there are still nagging questions from last year’s ALDS where Duffey, Littell, and Stashak all contributed negatively early in the series — would Pressly have been a little more “ready for prime time”, reduced our reliance on the above 3 names, and helped us set a different tone for the series? Some of that may be on Rocco’s decision making too. But any Pressly effect is probably small enough that it could be eclipsed by a good postseason series in the near future.
  6. Otto von Ballpark
    And who got the game-winning hit?
  7. Otto von Ballpark
    And that's actually tempered by his more "reasonable" 8 BB in 9.1 IP last year. in 2020, he has 8 BB in 1.2 IP now. (5 in 1.2 IP entering yesterday's game.) And yet Shelton brought him in to protect a lead in the 6th inning and a runner already in scoring position, knowing he'd either have to escape the inning of face a minimum of 3 batters, and with at least 3 better relievers apparently available...
  8. Otto von Ballpark
    Out-performed in a one-game sample in 2020? Here's how meaningful a one-game sample is: in Pressly's lone 2020 outing so far, he gave up 1 "earned" run in 2/3 of an inning -- and it was a due to a leadoff flyball misplayed into a triple, who only scored on an infield single with 2 outs by Anthony Rendon. Switch contexts, and I'm not sure Pressly and Alcala wouldn't have exchanged results too. Credit Alcala for settling into a decent outing, but let's not bring specious comparisons into play quite yet!
  9. Otto von Ballpark
    I know it benefitted the Twins last night, but it was kind of painful to watch Miguel Del Pozo be forced to throw to 3 batters. I mean, Shelton knows the rules and probably shouldn't have brought him into that situation to begin with, so he deserves plenty of blame, but I don't like that rule.
  10. Otto von Ballpark
    Even better -- prorated for 60 games, it's actually about $269k!
  11. Otto von Ballpark
    The outcome wasn't good, but I liked this game. Free TV, 6 PM start time, pitcher's duel, was over at 9 PM. Pace could be a little better -- this is the kind of game that should clock in closer to 2.5 hours than 3 hours, but a DVR helps in that regard.
  12. Otto von Ballpark
  13. Otto von Ballpark
    Garza had a 3.69 ERA (117 ERA+) and 4.18 FIP in 2007 for the Twins. His best single-season marks in Tampa were a 3.70 ERA (119 ERA+) and 4.14 FIP. I think it's fair to say he would have turned into much the same pitcher.
  14. Otto von Ballpark
    I thought the Young trade was included here more because of Garza, although technically he had graduated the prospect list in 2007 too. I guess even in 2008, both guys were still getting valued by their high top 100 ranks from 2007. Humber had lost his top 100 ranking by the time we traded for him too, but due to health/performance rather than graduation. It's not surprising Nathan wasn't on any lists -- not only was he drafted as a shortstop before converting to pitcher, he was actually a mediocre starting pitcher in the minors until converting to relief at age 28. I think top 100 lists can be useful, as long as one understands their limitations and context.
  15. Otto von Ballpark
    It appears Neagle was never a top 100 prospect. Baseball Reference has the BA lists going to back to 1990, reflected on their minor league player pages, and it shows nothing for Neagle: https://www.baseball-reference.com/register/player.fcgi?id=neagle001den Someone compiled the BA lists into a spreadsheet here too, no Neagle: https://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=0ApDc5PGsBzgVdDRwRU9PMXp3MV9mMERXek16N0s4WHc&hl=en For West, unfortunately I don't think BA's top 100 list existed before 1990 and West was ineligible by then. He was #2 on the Mets list in 1989, though, behind only Gregg Jeffries, so I suspect he could have done well in a top 100 list that year. https://www.baseballamerica.com/stories/1983-2000-top-10-prospects-rankings-archive/
  16. Otto von Ballpark
    FWIW, Trevor May was a top 100 prospect the offseason *before* we acquired him -- he had a pretty mediocre year at AA for the Phillies in 2012 which knocked him off lists.
  17. Otto von Ballpark
    It's a luxury tax thing. I don't think teams can send much arbitrary cash around any more -- it all has to be tied to a player's salary for specific seasons, for luxury tax purposes. So for example, if Maeda earns $8 mil in 2020 including incentives, that's all the Dodgers will be sending the Twins. If they tried to send $11 mil, then $3 mil of that would count against a future luxury tax season, and the Dodgers don't want that. (They're already over the tax threshold for 2020 anyway, but may try to stay under in 2021 or beyond.)
  18. Otto von Ballpark
    Worth noting the Twins are now incentivized to keep him starting for all of 2020 (well, at least up to the postseason) by the terms of the cash considerations coming from the Dodgers. The Dodgers are paying his $3 mil base salary this year, plus his $1 mil assignment bonus (for being traded), plus up to $7 mil in 2020 incentives, if he earns them -- but nothing after 2020: FWIW, 30 games started, 160 IP would be exactly $7 mil in incentives this year, so it's do-able if he stays healthy.
  19. Otto von Ballpark
    Mentioned in the other forum, but the $10 mil cash is interesting here. Mirroring the structure of Maeda’s contract, the Dodgers are only guaranteed to pay the Twins $4 mil in 2020 — but will also pay up to $7 mil in incentives if Maeda earns them this year:
  20. Otto von Ballpark
    I don't think I like this playoff expansion either, but I don't know that you can project backwards quite like this. Those 80-82 teams, and the 78-84 teams just behind them, etc., were playing under the old rules and thus may not have had as much motivation to push for a slightly better record. Now, it's certainly possible that it may shake out like this under the proposed system, but it may not happen with the frequency that the recent 2017 example might suggest.
  21. Otto von Ballpark
    Technically, free agent comp picks can't be traded anyway. Only "competitive balance" picks.
  22. Otto von Ballpark
    What did Barry Bonds suffer for cheating? Joe Niekro? Gaylord Perry? I totally get wanting to see the Astros players punished, but baseball doesn't have much of a history of meting out tough punishments on players for cheating. The strongest ones are the PED suspensions, but those are a lot easier to prove -- and a lot of people think those are weak punishments too.
  23. Otto von Ballpark
    Have you seen the TV ratings of sitcoms from the late 70's compared to today? Laverne & Shirley 1978-79: 30.5 The Big Bang Theory 2018-19: 10.6 Compare that to World Series Game 1 ratings: 1979: 28.5 2019: 8.1 Why, it's almost as if the whole media landscape has changed!
  24. Otto von Ballpark
  25. Otto von Ballpark
    You're right that Jansen has been mortal the past two years, and not worth $18 mil per year, but bWAR may not tell the whole story. 2018-2019 fWAR (Fangraphs, based on FIP) Jansen 1.5 Parker 0.0 FWIW, Jansen has a notable advantage is leverage usage too (1.64 vs 1.18) -- I don't think that's a factor in fWAR, although it should be a factor at B-Ref, so I'm not sure what's going on there. For fun, since I just remembered it existed: WARP (Baseball Prospectus) Jansen 3.3 Parker 0.5
×
×
  • Create New...