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
    What exactly do you mean? Your place in the video jumps around? Does that mean you aren't watching live?
  2. Otto von Ballpark
    Agreed. I don't think anyone expected Freese to sign so cheaply either, I'm not going to blame a GM for not anticipating that. That said, going forward, the Freese deal should put a damper on Plouffe extension talks, and probably even give us pause about an even higher arb salary for him in 2017 (pending 2016 results, of course).
  3. Otto von Ballpark
    Changing the credit card is not the only way to stop the auto-renew. You can turn it off in your MLB account under subscriptions. You can even do it before your subscription has expired, it doesn't cancel anything, it just tells it not to renew. I pretty much cancel the auto-renew immediately every time I sign up. Make the change there, get a screenshot of it, and then notify MLB if they still try to renew later (and do a credit card chargeback if MLB takes too long to respond), although I've never had a problem with the cancellation preference "sticking".
  4. Otto von Ballpark
    Morneau was out for much of last season with a neck injury (as well as more concussion symptoms). It's quite possible someone was referencing that but mis-spoke or mis-heard (not necessarily you, it could have been Mauer or his source of the information too). Or the "surgery" in question was a very minor procedure?
  5. Otto von Ballpark
    Well, to be fair, I don't think it's really about how much Graham could contribute today, I think it's just sticking to the plan for him all along, which was to option him after his Rule 5 restrictions were gone. It does seem odd to stockpile such guys via Rule 5 as we have apparently done with Pressly and now Graham. It's not bad to get such a guy out of Rule 5, of course, but middle relievers on a AAA-MLB shuttle aren't exactly a difficult thing to acquire otherwise. Interestingly, Johan Santana made the club out of spring training in his second year here (2001), although he was optioned after a few weeks of limited mop-up duty.
  6. Otto von Ballpark
    There is no vacant spot on the 40-man implied in SydneyTwinsFan's scenario -- Abad takes Tonkin's spot. I also suspect his roster is mostly accurate, although I see Duffey in AAA, Nolasco in the rotation, and Kintzler added to the pen. Might be further machinations to roster Sweeney and/or Quentin, likely at the expense of Buxton, Santana, and/or Arcia.
  7. Otto von Ballpark
    I like to sort by "OppQual" at B-Ref to determine the likely roster. That's showing you who's getting the first crack at playing time this spring against other team's A-listers, and thus who is probably on track to make the opening day roster. Abad is pretty much locked in already as the LH RP, as I suspected since his signing. Kintzler looks like a decent bet to make the club too, with Tonkin's odds looking long and Graham probably ticketed for AAA. Burdi brings up the rear among RH RP, so I don't think he has much of a shot. He was and still is in the same boat as Chargois, Melotakis, Landa, etc., except since Burdi isn't on the 40-man roster yet, there is less risk of keeping him around camp longer (an injury in camp would land him on a minor league DL rather than the MLB DL, and thus not collect MLB service time). On the position player side, I think the only question is around OF/DH -- Sweeney and Quentin are getting long looks.
  8. Otto von Ballpark
    Or, remember back in 2013, a lot of posters argued the Twins were making a mistake by not manipulating Hicks' service time. I think good pitching prospects fall closer to guys like Hicks than they do to elite position player prospects, in terms of how much these service time manipulations actually matter, and how much priority teams place on them.
  9. Otto von Ballpark
    Good point on the 20 days, although I don't think we have seen too many cases of that in regards to these kinds of early career service time games either. Putting someone on the 40-man for a late season call-up is generally an indicator you don't care about service time manipulation with them. Control is great, and I am not saying I wouldn't do it with Berrios, but note that with those two Rays pitchers you mention, the team didn't put any great priority on manipulating their service time. That's my whole point, is that these service time games matter less for pitchers than hitters. The reason Berrios will start in the minors is because of the glut of starters ahead of him. If we lost a SP candidates in a bizarre gardening accident tomorrow, and another by spontaneous combustion the day after, Berrios could quite likely make the opening day roster and few would mind about the 7th year. I really think that is more ofba focus for fans than it is for MLB clubs (not that MLB clubs are unaware of the implications, but they just put a much lower priority on achieving them).
  10. Otto von Ballpark
    I don't think any MLB pitchers can be projected to make 31 starts 6-7 years from now. At least not at any particular quality. Heck, Fernandez probably still isn't projected for that many starts, 3-4 years from now. Elite young position players tend to get longer contracts than elite young pitchers, just because there is a bit more stability in their projection. Why would we not assume that is also a factor in whether teams prioritize service time games at the start of their career?
  11. Otto von Ballpark
    Even going back to the Jose Fernandez example, where Jeremy chided the Marlins for sacrificing that 7th year of control -- what did it really cost them? Fernandez got hurt, which is suppressing his arbitration salaries (and he only has 3 years of arb, instead of 4 had they delayed his promotion by 2 weeks). And he's still dogged by health concerns even after a dominant return. If they wind up trading him, it will almost certainly be to a team putting a premium on his immediate contributions and not his speculative contributions 3-4 years from now. Of course, an extra year of control wouldn't hurt his value (although it would be partially offset by the extra year of arb), and his extra start in 2013 was especially meaningless given the otherwise hopeless Marlins squad that year, but it really doesn't look like it will have a major effect, despite him immediately exceeding expectations on the field. (Of course, there are plenty of other reasons to chide the Marlins. )
  12. Otto von Ballpark
    Pitching prospects have a ton more variability in their projections than position players. That extra year of control, or even that extra year of arb, just doesn't mean as much over a wider range of projected outcomes. I did find another pitcher who appears to have been held back to avoid Super-2, Zach Wheeler. And you know what happened to him? Elbow injury and he's missed a full season and counting, before he would have even been eligible for arbitration as a super-2 anyway. Whatever future value they gained or money they saved by holding him back is probably dwarfed by that one injury. The same can happen for a position player, of course (Wil Myers recently), but I don't think it is controversial to say that's a far more likelier outcome for a pitching prospect than a hitting prospect. In 2 weeks, assuming 2 games started, a starting pitcher can easily have as much or more influence on a team's record than a position player. Which is why you see a lot of teams essentially trade that speculative extra year of control (or Super-2 arbitration status, in the case of Syndergaard) for a few weeks of the present-day pitcher. Even penny-pinchers like the Rays (although as noted upthread, maybe not the Pirates with Gerrit Cole).
  13. Otto von Ballpark
    It makes a difference because his promotion, like virtually all promotions of pitching prospects, can't be primarily tied to service time considerations. Not even close. Still, obviously holding back position players for service time reasons has been going on a long time. Longoria was way back in 2008, with tons of readily available examples. Even if there are only half as many pitching prospects, in that time frame there should certainly be more pitcher examples than the limited ones detailed in this thread, if teams really value their service time the same as that of position players.
  14. Otto von Ballpark
    I don't think those comments are far different. When I say "less obvious", I don't mean plus or minus 5 days. It's usually weeks or months different, even last season, which was 7 years after Longoria. deGrom and Syndergaard were mentioned earlier in the thread, and they actually debuted about as close to the Super-2 date in June as they did to the extra year of control date in April. At that point, it's very far from clear that service time is the primary factor in their promotions. Given the evidence, I definitely think that posters here are overvaluing the 7th year of control for Berrios, as compared to the Twins and to the rest of the league. Not saying I endorse one approach or the other, just noting the disconnect. The date of Berrios's MLB promotion is unlikely to be driven primarily by service time considerations, almost regardless of team (although it seems especially unlikely on the Twins).
  15. Otto von Ballpark
    I will add that I'm not saying service time is zero factor with pitchers, but it seems pretty clear that they are: - less likely to see service time games than position players - generally see far less obvious service time games than position players (suggesting that service time is more on equal footing with other factors, rather than being the clear primary factor)
  16. Otto von Ballpark
    You already did some research, and found pitcher prospect debut dates scattered throughout the year. I've already presented the case of the penny-pinching Rays, who obviously held back elite prospects Longoria and Myers for service time reasons, but arguably have never done it for any of their many pitching prospects (with the possible exception of Price although he was on a strict pitch/innings count at the time). I'm not sure what more evidence you want? If and when the Twins fail to call up Berrios close to 12 days into the season, can that be considered evidence?
  17. Otto von Ballpark
    Absolutely, I agree with this. But if the Twins were missing a couple starters right now, I have no doubt that Berrios would be strongly considered for the opening day rotation. Heck, it wouldn't shock me if they found a way to do it anyway -- well, the aggressiveness would pleasantly surprise me, but ignoring the service time implications wouldn't shock me at all. I will be shocked if Berrios is up after 12 days or thereabouts, without a legit coincidental injury.
  18. Otto von Ballpark
    They are wildly different situations. Rodon threw 24 professional innings the year prior. Even with his college innings, he only threw 122 total in 2014. There was absolutely an argument to give him a late start in 2015 to control those innings, which is exactly what the White Sox did. I am sure they weren't unaware of the service time implications, but given his mop-up usage for his first 3 weeks in MLB, it is pretty clear the innings were likely the primary factor. I have no problem with holding Berrios down for 12 days, given our glut of SP options to sort through. I am not disagreeing on that at all. It just seems really odd to frame it as a service time imperative when that doesn't seem to be the case league-wide. And it would be completely un-Twins-like to call up Berrios 12 days into the season, barring a coincidental injury. They only called up Buxton when Hicks got hurt. They didn't call up Sano until almost a month after the Super-2 threshold date, and it arguably cost them a playoff spot.
  19. Otto von Ballpark
    Rodon was a bit of a special case too, first full pro season, especially considering the White Sox used him in mop-up duty for his first 3 weeks in MLB anyway.
  20. Otto von Ballpark
    I did notice Price recently, although he was a bit of a special case. He got a late start in 2008 (his first pro season), and he was on a strict pitch count in the early part of 2009 as they gradually ramped up his innings. Yes, they did get an extra year of control, and I don't think the Rays were unaware of that, but I don't think it was their top priority. The Rays have had numerous other pitching prospects who haven't seen any service time games, like Archer (who qualified for Super-2 status) and Moore, Davis, and Hellickson (who all came up late one season then made the opening day roster the following year).
  21. Otto von Ballpark
    Doesn't that kind of prove my point? Top position player prospects have frequently been called up after ~12 days like Bryant (Springer, Longoria) or immediately after the Super 2 date in June (Lindor, Correa, Myers, Polanco, etc.). Pitchers have rarely been called up at those times. It's spread out through the year. I think teams are not using service time as a big factor in their pitcher promotions.
  22. Otto von Ballpark
    Not quite. The first "off day" is the second day of the season. So as early as April 10th, you would need a 5th starter, or have your #2 start on short rest.
  23. Otto von Ballpark
    Jeremy, don't you think the fact that no baseball team has ever held down a top pitching prospect for 12 days at the start of the season suggest that maybe we're over-valuing that extra year of control for pitchers? Fernandez (predictably) getting hurt probably suppresses his pre-FA salaries enough to offset much of whatever premium the Marlins or whoever will have to pay to buy out his first FA year. Had he struggled in his return like Liriano, they could have optioned him and recovered some service time too. Teams have been holding back elite position player prospects for some time now, and have only very rarely done it for pitchers (most notably, Gerrit Cole was called up after the super 2 threshold date).
  24. Otto von Ballpark
    Not quite true. Nolasco was scheduled to start the day after the 2013 season ended, so he made a tune-up relief appearance in a meaningless game 162 instead. He got skipped in the NLDS as the Dodgers used only 3 starters, but that was more about the other Dodgers starters: thanks to off days, Greinke was available on full rest for a potential Game 5, so they opted to use Kershaw on short rest in Game 4, rather than potentially lose the series without Greinke starting a second game. Nolasco went on to start Game 4 of the NLCS. He didn't make any relief appearances in the postseason. He was admittedly shaky in his last 3 starts of the regular season, and wasn't exactly trusted in the postseason, but I don't think your characterization of the situation is quite fair.
  25. Otto von Ballpark
    Another note on spring training pitch counts: http://www.truebluela.com/2016/3/2/11150360/dodgers-spring-training-viewing-guide-2016 I imagine there are similar issues in the Grapefruit League too.
×
×
  • Create New...