Jump to content
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
    I'm just saying, it might be a more accurate comparison than just Maeda vs Ryu and their contracts alone.
  2. Otto von Ballpark
    How about Ryu + Graterol, versus Maeda?
  3. Otto von Ballpark
    He did say "sustained" ERA which seems to imply he was looking for more than just random 1 year "aces". (A 3.48 ERA in Dodger Stadium for one year isn't particularly ace-like -- Alex Wood and Ross Stripling have achieved better than that in recent years too.) Also, in that 2016 postseason -- Maeda's only postseason as a starter -- he gave up 12 hits, 9 walks + HBP, and 8 runs in 10.2 innings across 3 starts. Which sort of diminishes his regular season, and likely contributed to why the Dodgers were willing to shift him from the rotation in 2017-2019.
  4. Otto von Ballpark
    Verlander has won 14 playoff games. (He hasn't won any World Series games, although his team has won 1 and he's pitched well enough to win a few times, even if he did have a pair of clunkers with Detroit.) 8-1 in the division series which the Twins could sorely use!
  5. Otto von Ballpark
    Couldn't that just as well be used as an argument against trading Graterol for Maeda? Did we have to give up Graterol for another above-average player who may or may not get hot at the right time? And of course, Garza was 24 years old and Freese 28, both basically in their second MLB seasons, when they achieved their primary postseason success. Does that suggest Maeda has the greater chance at postseason glory going forward?
  6. Otto von Ballpark
    I know park factors aren't exact science, but they do contain adjustments for these factors. Don't get me wrong -- the Dodgers have had good pitching staffs, better than those of the Twins. But the point of these park factors wasn't to suggest they are equal -- it's just that the stadiums are likely stretching the difference further.
  7. Otto von Ballpark
    I'm not so sure. Above average starter is, what, 2-2.5 WAR? That's about where Maeda is now. Do we discount that for age? And he'll probably be getting ~$10 mil salary to do that, after incentives. Seems like we've been seeing that kind of cost/performance in modest trade and FA moves (Odorizzi, Pineda, potentially Gibson?) without giving up a ~$20 mil asset like Graterol for the privilege. And a quality, well-leveraged reliever, even a 1-inning one, can put up 1-2 WAR without too much trouble. Relievers are generally more replaceable than starters, but there's good value in that kind of relief performance at league minimum salary.
  8. Otto von Ballpark
    Also, in regards to Maeda's contract and bullpen usage -- keep in mind why he was on that unusual contract to begin with: He was projected to get a 5/60 deal that winter by MLBTR, and only ended up with a 8/25 guarantee! His usage by the Dodgers is pretty consistent with both his performance and that health concern, it seems.
  9. Otto von Ballpark
    Maeda's a good pitcher, but this might be exaggerated a bit by park factors and defense. Per ESPN, Dodger stadium has averaged in the bottom third for "hits" park factors the past 4 years (as compared to Target Field, which has averaged top third over that time). http://www.espn.com/mlb/stats/parkfactor/_/year/2016/sort/hitsFactor And B-Ref has given Dodgers pitchers a boost from RA9def ("support from defense") over that time too (as compared to Twins pitchers who have been more neutral or negative in that mark).
  10. Otto von Ballpark
    I think his postseason usage is the clincher here. They used him exclusively as a reliever (and primarily a 1-inning reliever) in the 2017-2019 postseasons, when his contract incentives were 100% irrelevant. That tells me it was far more of a baseball decision than a financial one. Keep in mind, while you or I may think "money is money, why not save it", money alone is of very little concern for the Dodgers -- their revenues can support all kinds of player spending. What's more important is 1) winning a World Series, and 2) what luxury tax bracket they end up in. And they had a lot more ways to address their luxury tax bracket than holding back Maeda, especially if they felt it compromised their World Series goal at all.
  11. Otto von Ballpark
    He's speechless!
  12. Otto von Ballpark
    I'm not sure I understand. You say it was absolutely due to money, but then you cite depth -- it appears the Dodgers absolutely had a depth reason for holding back Maeda. He ranked last in ERA among their top 7-9 starters (by GS) each season from 2017-2019, the 3 years they have shifted him to the pen. Seems like depth was a much bigger reason than money (especially considering Maeda's incentives would have been irrelevant to their luxury tax bracket for 2017, at least).
  13. Otto von Ballpark
    Just to be clear, I think I endorse this trade. I haven't been quite as high on Graterol's future value as some, and I recognize the value of Maeda's contract. It seems like a fair deal. FWIW, baseballtradevalues.com is a little more pessimistic. They forecast 12.2 median future value for Maeda, as compared to 21.1 for Graterol.
  14. Otto von Ballpark
    Yeah, I agree he's not a #5 starter. And Graterol might be a fair price for him, on this contract. One more note on Wheeler vs. Maeda -- Fangraphs currently projects Wheeler with a 1.5 WAR advantage for 2020, or 1.0 WAR if you prorate Maeda's innings (although prorating may not be fair to Wheeler, as Maeda has never thrown that many innings since he left Japan). If you use the common estimate of $8 mil per WAR on the open market, one could expect Wheeler to be worth ~$12 mil more per season than Maeda. And indeed, he's making $23.6 mil per season, and Maeda would make $10.65 mil if he hits those incentives. (Of course, there's benefit to the incentive structure vs a full guarantee, but there's also the cost of Graterol to factor in too.)
  15. Otto von Ballpark
    With Maeda's unique contract, I could actually see TR making this move, under these conditions. But the opportunity never really presented itself (contending team, prospect equivalent to Graterol, and perhaps most of all, Maeda's contract).
  16. Otto von Ballpark
    None of those numbers are adjusted. The Mets had pretty horrific defense last year -- as an illustration, B-Ref says an average pitcher, pitching in the same conditions as Wheeler (park/opponents/defense), would have had a 5.08 RA9 last year; Maeda, only 4.12. That's a pretty massive difference, if true! Thus, both bWAR and fWAR give Wheeler a significant edge on Maeda, about 1.5-2 WAR, even after prorating Maeda's innings. Also, $3 mil is only Maeda's base salary. He's likely to earn more in incentives, especially as a full-time starter -- still less than Wheeler, of course, but it closes the gap a little. The value of Graterol closes the gap a little further too. (And Maeda is 2+ years older than Wheeler, so his future projections are likely a little worse.)
  17. Otto von Ballpark
    I'm not so sure -- that would surely have invited a grievance. The Dodgers first shifted Maeda to the pen in June 2017, after he had a stint on the IL and a bad start to the season -- 5.21 ERA at that point. He improved over the next few months, but sputtered in August/September again and finished with a 4.22 ERA, which ranked last among the top 7 Dodgers by games started that season. Pretty clearly justified moving him to the pen. More of the same in 2018 -- 3.80 ERA when he shifted to the pen on August 10th, again ranking last among Dodgers top 7 starters. And in 2019 -- 4.11 ERA on August 28th, ranking last among the Dodgers top 9 starters. And in terms of financial impact, his incentives wouldn't have made much difference in 2017 because they were so far over the top luxury tax threshold. Would have been closer in 2018 and 2019 but I'm not quite sure if they would have had luxury tax implications (Maeda missed time both seasons anyway on the IL and the paternity list).
  18. Otto von Ballpark
    But Miranda has been the opposite of Arraez to date, in terms of actually getting hits when he puts the ball in play (BABIP). .255 at A+, vs .358 at the same level and age for Arraez. Career minor league BABIP marks are .271 for Miranda, and .358 for Arraez. Thus, despite having similar K% and BB% and better power (ISO), Miranda trails Arraez considerably in total offensive production: 104 wRC+ for his minor league career, vs 134 for Arraez. Miranda is still young, but it looks like he's going to have to make considerable changes to his offensive game beyond just adjusting to new levels.
  19. Otto von Ballpark
    Nola and Severino were the two comps last offseason. But Berrios was a year behind them in service time, so it's possible the Twins were hoping for a bigger discount in whatever offer they made last winter. (Maybe something more like a Polanco or Kepler type deal?) I would expect a Nola and Severino type offer this winter, but maybe Berrios wants more? I hope the Twins still think he is worth it!
  20. Otto von Ballpark
    Cooper, Miles Mikolas did not have 4 years of team control remaining. His original 2 year contract with the Cardinals, after returning from Japan, would have made him a free agent again after 2019 (essentially counting his service time earned in Japan). https://www.vivaelbirdos.com/2018/9/12/17848144/do-the-cardinals-need-to-make-a-decision-on-miles-mikolas Here’s the skinny on Mikolas’s contract situation: he signed a two-year contract this past offseason, worth $15.5 million total. The money is an even split; he’ll make the same $7.8 in 2019 that he made this year. There was language put into the contract that makes Mikolas a free agent following the 2019 season; due to his low amount of service the first time around in MLB, he’s not actually reached the service time milestone necessary to avoid the arbitration system, and thus it had to be put into the contract. But since there’s been some confusion over the course of the season, I figured it was important to spell out here that yes, Miles Mikolas will be a free agent after the 2019 season.
  21. Otto von Ballpark
    The Twins were 16th in those "power rankings" a year ago. How much stock did you put in that? https://www.mlb.com/news/mlb-power-rankings
  22. Otto von Ballpark
    Maybe this is the true curse affecting our Twins in the 21st century, rather than those of Mike Trombley or Big Papi?
  23. Otto von Ballpark
    I'd argue for Lenny Webster. May 31, 1991: Twins lose to fall to 23-25, 5th place, 5.5 games out of first; Junior Ortiz placed on DL after the game, Lenny Webster recalled June 1: Twins begin 15 game winning streak June 16: Ortiz activated, Webster sent down, Twins finish the day at 38-25, in first place June 17: Twins lose first game since May 31st Without that Webster magic, it's possible the Twins don't even win the division in 1991!
  24. Otto von Ballpark
    They have a literal river of fire! https://clevelandhistorical.org/items/show/63
  25. Otto von Ballpark
    A few problems with that: 1. Rosario has some value in general, but I don't think he has any real value to the Pirates right now, since they are non-contenders and he has only 2 years of control left at non-negligible salary. 2. Archer is basically a throw-in for that trade proposal -- doubtful the Pirates would do that, with his value at his lowest. Their payroll is low enough now they can afford to keep his salary and bet on a bounceback instead (in fact, the Pirates might start to get in trouble with the MLBPA for their low payroll).
×
×
  • Create New...