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
    Well, it wasn't a report that the offer was in fact "junk". It was speculation based on some incomplete reports. If Adams knew anything about pieces offered beyond De Leon, he never published them. Also, this "junk" comment by Adams was in a chat or comments section, was it not? I just tried searching MLBTR proper for it with no results. That would push it further into the speculative category, IMO, and not something that should be suggested as a report.
  2. Otto von Ballpark
    A month on the DL last year and it is invalidated as a "full season"? Neat trick. Forsythe still had 567 PA last year. (Your career retrospective on Mauer should be interesting, dismissing 2009 as "not a full season" ) Forsythe and Dozier also have an equal number of qualifying seasons above a 104 OPS+. Per PA, Forsythe actually has more bWAR over the last 2 years than Dozier. Dozier has the advantage in fWAR rate over that same period. They are virtually the same age too, and both late bloomers. The big difference is that Dozier bloomed a little earlier, and then had the HR binge late last year. A big part of their difference going forward is in how one projects that HR binge. Steamer prefers Dozier by about 0.9 WAR next year given the same number of PA (I haven't had a chance to check ZIPS yet).
  3. Otto von Ballpark
    Another point: the Rays are pretty well-regarded in the pitching department. Does this one-for-one swap suggest that maybe we've been too pessimistic in our analysis of De Leon so far? The 2017 Rays have earned more benefit of the doubt on that front than, say, the 2012 Twins deading Span for Meyer straight-up.
  4. Otto von Ballpark
    It's obviously not talking about C prospects. Deals aren't held back over two C prospects within reason. This clearly suggests the Twins were asking for 2 additional decent prospects. That suggests to me -- maybe they were asking for too much? Maybe the Dodgers resisted including Stewart not because they valued him too highly to be the second piece in the trade, but because it wouldn't have satisfied the Twins demands anyway? Why offer Stewart or Calhoun if it's not even going to get the deal done? They already stuck their neck out quite a bit by offering De Leon. Obviously it is hard to tell from here, but I can't help but wonder if the Twins didn't listen to this opportunity as much as they could have.
  5. Otto von Ballpark
    The difference in Steamer projections is less than 1 WAR if you prorate them to the same number of PA's. They still "project" Forsythe in part based on his backup status from 3 years ago.
  6. Otto von Ballpark
    I don't think Buehler is necessarily valued higher by the Dodgers right now, in a strict literal sense. He is actually valued lower by everyone else because of his inexperience. If Buehler had been the top player offered for Dozier or Forsythe, there would have been even more calls for a significant second piece. Because of that, it made more sense for the Dodgers to keep Buehler and hope some experience can bump his value/usefulness up to De Leon's level. Trading Buehler or Alvarez now would have been selling low, like the Padres did with Trea Turner a few years ago.
  7. Otto von Ballpark
    It doesn't change your point, but Buehler was actually chosen 24th overall. (Don't think the Dodgers have chose as high as 8th recently!)
  8. Otto von Ballpark
    Doesn't this Morosi tweet (Twins wanted 2 additional players) suggest that the Dodgers were maybe offering one guy in addition to De Leon? Not Alvarez or another top guy, but I do wonder about Calhoun or other less mentioned prospects. Not quite junk, even if many believe it still wasn't enough.
  9. Otto von Ballpark
    FYI, Forsythe actually has a higher bWAR per PA rate than Dozier over the past 2 years. (Dozier does have the advantage in fWAR.)
  10. Otto von Ballpark
    Our long regional nightmare may soon be over!
  11. Otto von Ballpark
    Good point, especially on Crawford. Although I can't imagine the Phillies want to count on Galvis too much going forward. Yeah, he hit 20 HR, but that's about all he did -- same 79 OPS+ as the year before when he only hit 7 HR. Even with above-average defense and baserunning, B-Ref pegged him for only 1.3 WAR playing virtually every day at SS last season. With a rising price tag in his second-to-last season of arb eligibility, I could see the Phillies preferring to deal Galvis and keeping Hernandez. But I could also see that plan changing if someone was willing to pay enough for Hernandez (and as you suggest, that may not even require as much as De Leon).
  12. Otto von Ballpark
    The extension removed a lot of our flexibility and options with Hughes. Without a long, solid history, you should almost always prefer a pitcher on a 2/16 deal (what he had left) over a 5/55 deal, especially a backloaded one (what we gave him with the extension). Under the pre-extension scenario, you seem to be worried about how much he will cost to retain if he continues performing well over the remaining two years, but you are ignoring the fact that he would have been an INCREDIBLY valuable trade piece under those circumstances, or fetched a valuable comp pick this winter. (Or, if we really wanted to retain him, he'd probably be worth the $75+ mil he'd command after 3 strong seasons.) Even with performance regression, he would have been a decent trade chip. With injury or a lot a performance regression, we would have had the inside track to re-sign him on a one-year bounceback deal like that of Tyson Ross. So there really was no "bad case" pre-extension, it was pure upside for the Twins. As it stands, the extension made it virtually impossible to trade him for several years. Even now, if he fulfills our hopes and returns to usefulness in 2017, he is probably not a trade asset for at least 2 years unless we eat cash. We really have to hope for 2-3 years of health and usefulness from him.
  13. Otto von Ballpark
    I think having Salad in the clubhouse could also benefit Sano.
  14. Otto von Ballpark
    They had Rich Hill for 6 starts last year, on the roster for only 2 months. Having him under contract for the full upcoming season is an improvement over that, even if he is technically a "re-sign". And tying this back to the 2000s era Twins continues to be erroneous -- the Dodgers have regularly made big commitments in salary and trade in recent years. Just because they're not doing it right now with Dozier doesn't mean they are "standing pat and counting on individual improvement to get over the hump". Get back to me if they haven't made any major moves and still have the same holes on August 1st.
  15. Otto von Ballpark
    Verdugo hasn't been mentioned quite as frequently as Bellinger, but a few outlets have mentioned him as a fellow "untouchable": http://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/local/Dodgers-Doubtful-to-Land-Brian-Dozier-After-Talks-With-Twins-Stall-410384865.html I think there are different classes of "untouchable" of course -- some guys they don't want to give up at all, some they probably just don't want to package with De Leon straight up for Dozier.
  16. Otto von Ballpark
    Actually only 4 years, all at arb prices (Hernandez is a super 2 qualifier). I don't know that he has a ton of upside either -- he strikes me as a utility guy who had a solid season, and he will be 27 in May. Shades of Escobar? Don't get me wrong, the Phillies probably aren't likely to move him at the moment, but they'd probably listen to offers similar to those made for Dozier.
  17. Otto von Ballpark
    It will vary by team: http://www.forbes.com/sites/maurybrown/2016/11/30/breaking-down-mlbs-new-2017-21-collective-bargaining-agreement/#201d88fc42a1 I assume the Twins are in that first group ("a non-market disqualified Revenue Sharing Payee Club") since we are getting a competitive balance pick this year. Of course, Dozier would have to get a $50+ mil FA deal to trigger that too.
  18. Otto von Ballpark
    As long as neither team has yet to go a different direction, I consider the deal open even if talks are not remotely active at the moment. Feb. 10 or so is my next time deadline -- after that, it would probably wait until June or July.
  19. Otto von Ballpark
    And I think that might be a factor here. The Twins have absolutely nothing of MLB value to the Dodgers that they can pair with Dozier right now, which makes it a lot harder to convince them to give up multiple top prospects. I still can't shake the feeling the Dodgers might prefer to use their prospect assets to make a bigger splash, like in a Rays trade (Archer or Colome becoming the headliners, plus Forsythe). Which might not come until July...
  20. Otto von Ballpark
    De Jong is generally considered less than Stewart, as well as behind him (only made 1 start above AA so far). I could see the Dodgers ideally wanting to break camp with either De Leon or Stewart in the rotation. Buehler isn't going to help the MLB team in 2017 like Stewart could. But, with a good first half in the minors, Buehler would have a lot more trade value, maybe enough to swing a blockbuster deal like for Chris Archer. It's a tricky balance. I get the concerns about Calhoun, but compared to the rest of our roster, that contact/power skill set looks pretty special.
  21. Otto von Ballpark
    Again, re-signing rental Rich Hill is something. Nothing huge, but probably equivalent to the Giants one big offseason move so far (signing Melancon).
  22. Otto von Ballpark
    I think asking for Stewart in addition to De Leon is sort of unreasonable. It looks fine from a prospect value perspective, but it puts a bit of strain on their MLB club when they are trying to maximize those wins. Kazmir, McCarthy, and Ryu are pretty big suspects going into 2017. Substitute Calhoun for Stewart and I think that proposal functions very similarly. Although we are still left wondering if the Dodgers have offered that, or if the Twins have done anything to indicate they would be willing to accept that offer now.
  23. Otto von Ballpark
    Stewart is only excluded because he provides the same current MLB utility as De Leon and they don't want to lose them both. Buehler is excluded because he has the potential to be a top 50 prospect in the very near future. Neither of those factors applies to Calhoun, and his name hasn't been mentioned anywhere yet, so I wouldn't be so certain about writing him off as a potential second piece if the Twins are open to that.
  24. Otto von Ballpark
    See, to me, that's getting overly picky when you dismiss someone who matches your value target based on "fit." The Twins roster can fit just about anyone right now. Also, Stewart is rising B type (okay, B- by Sickels) at arguably our biggest area of need. Like the Dodgers would resist losing both Stewart and De Leon at the same time, the Twins might need to be more receptive to that.
  25. Otto von Ballpark
    That sounds a lot like De Leon plus Calhoun, which you have been dismissive of.
×
×
  • Create New...