Jump to content
Our free agent ranking is up to 100 names, and now you can filter by player position! Click here to check it out! ×
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
    The advance requirement is so teams actually know who is available in the Rule 5, which would be difficult if teams were protecting their players at the last minute. The "revision" I am suggesting doesn't actually add anyone for protection, just removes a player. Happens all the time as free agents are signed or waiver claims are made, doesn't seem like it would be functionally different to drop a guy and immediately make a Rule 5 selection. In any case, answering my own question, I think they can drop guys pretty late. I see Ortiz was officially released the exact same day we drafted Jose Morban back in the 2002 Rule 5 draft. EDIT TO ADD: I did find this, though: "A player cannot be sent outright to the minors on the two days prior to the Rule 5 Draft and on the day of the Rule 5 Draft up through the conclusion of the draft." http://www.thecubreporter.com/book/export/html/3530 So if you wanted to keep the player you are removing (outright to minors if he clears waivers), you can't do it in the 2 days leading up to the Rule 5 draft. You could release him like we did with Ortiz though, but that makes him a full free agent.
  2. Otto von Ballpark
    While I don't quite get the Simmons trade, the Braves did receive Newcomb who has most recently been ranked #19 by MLB Pipeline, #25 by Keith Law, #37 by BA, etc. By comparison, Polanco was #75 at MLB Pipeline. Not sure if he's an adequate headliner to pull off this kind of deal.
  3. Otto von Ballpark
    Gray, career ERA- 76 and FIP- 87 Miller, career ERA- 87 and FIP- 103 (100 is league average, lower is better) Plus Gray has an extra year of control at league minimum salary right now.
  4. Otto von Ballpark
    Career 115 ERA+, 3.2 BB/9, 7.6 K/9, all in the NL. Gibson was up to 108 ERA+, 3.0 BB/9, and 6.7 K/9 last year. Why bother? Miller also only has 3 years of control left, all at arbitration salaries (projected $4.9 mil this year and going up from there). Of course, I really don't know what the Braves are doing.
  5. Otto von Ballpark
    I assume you mean he should have been second? The Astros were projected for 4.7 more wins at Fangraphs, but they also finished with 3 more wins and a playoff berth which I think more than offsets the projected difference.
  6. Otto von Ballpark
    Reynaldo Rodriguez just re-signed with us as a minor league free agent, those players are eligible to be picked in Rule 5 but it's pretty rare. R.A. Dickey is the notable example of that, although he was a knuckleballer who had extensive MLB experience at the time. No one is going to select the soon to be 30, zero MLB experience, 115 wRC+ at AAA 1B Reynaldo Rodriguez.
  7. Otto von Ballpark
    Since tomorrow (Friday Nov. 20) is the deadline to protect players, we should see a lot more comprehensive lists after that. Unfortunately, the Twins are 17th in line. It's usually very slim pickings by that point -- even the guys that "stick" at that point in the draft tend to be low-upside players, and they often don't really stick but the teams negotiation a trade (like Scott Diamond). We are probably better off just protecting an extra guy of our own. How late can we drop a player to make room for a Rule 5 selection, though? Could we DFA someone like Achter the very day of the draft if a name we like is still on the board as our pick comes up?
  8. Otto von Ballpark
    Actually, I believe they officially need the player's permission to do it. Technically, they aren't directly selling the player's contract, they first reach an agreement with the foreign team and announce it, then they release the player (after clearing waivers as a formality), and finally the player signs with the foreign team. That releasing step is key -- a team that tried this without the player's consent would actually just make him a free agent, free to sign with any team of his choosing (including MLB). So the Twins did not pass up a chance to make a buck with Colabello. There literally was no chance to do so without Colabello's consent. So in this case when Mike Radcliff says, "The player has to agree," that's actually referring to an official requirement rather than a kind Twins gesture,
  9. Otto von Ballpark
    Right, I know they aren't forcing it, but they may be pushing it when MLB opportunities are still available for the player.
  10. Otto von Ballpark
    It's great that they pass the offer along to the player... but maybe a little less great if they are doing it largely to free up the roster spot, which they could also do by putting the player on waivers and let them get another chance in the USA first. And given the frequency that the Twins have been doing this, I think that's a valid concern.
  11. Otto von Ballpark
    As I am thinking, I realize Colabello, Albers, Johnson, and now Vargas all had an option remaining when the Twins broached selling their rights to an Asian team. I wonder if they used that as leverage, basically telling them it's a numbers game here and they are likely to be stuck in AAA all season, or we could release you to sign with an Asian team. I wouldn't think there's anything particularly admirable about that, if you want to free up the roster spot, put them on waivers and see if an MLB could use them first. They might still get stashed in another team's AAA club but maybe not as far down the depth chart, and having options makes them more attractive in that sense -- they might be less likely to see any service time if they couldn't be optioned.
  12. Otto von Ballpark
    Interesting to see Francisco "K-Rod" Rodriguez traded to Detroit: http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2015/11/tigers-to-acquire-francisco-rodriguez.html Suggests Milwaukee is moving further toward a rebuild, and that Detroit perhaps isn't? A modest cost in trade (A-ball 2B, most recently graded C+ by Sickels), a modest contract with two years of control remaining -- should the Twins have been in on this? Rodriguez has been pretty darn good the past few years, a few times even in setup roles, and apparently happy playing in the midwest. He could have closed or setup Perkins, or alternated based on match ups. Crazy to think K-Rod is only a year older than Perkins too! And only 2 years older than Jepsen. He's really been around forever.
  13. Otto von Ballpark
    I don't believe there is any provision to protect more than 40 players for the MLB phase of the Rule 5 draft, even after one of your unprotected players has been selected. I don't think I've heard of such a provision for the minor league phase either (although the minor league phases are pretty all-encompassing, isn't Brian Buscher one of the great minor league phase success stories? ).
  14. Otto von Ballpark
    Sorry, didn't mean to contribute to the Ortiz hijack! But there is often a lot of misinformation spread about the circumstances surrounding his release. Certainly no one could have predicted a HOF type career for him, but at no point did it look like a terribly wise move. To bring it back on topic, I wonder if we ever approached Ortiz about going to Asia?
  15. Otto von Ballpark
    Thanks for the clarification. Given you are describing his performance relative to expectations, I think that's much better described as pleasantly surprising/unexpected rather than ridiculous. Which is good, but probably well short of vaulting him to the top 15 or so among Rule 5 eligible players. Teams don't draft players in Rule 5 on the basis of how much they exceeded expectations at AAA. How many players entering their age 27 season have been selected in the Rule 5 draft, much less stuck with their new team? Outside the odd cases of RA Dickey and Andy Oliver (who both had previous MLB experience), I can't recall any. Protecting Dean due to "improvements of his breaking pitches" (which only manifested themselves in his results on contact in a AAA pitcher's league and not in K% or BB%), against draft history and Dean's own track record, would indeed be crazy. Glad to hear you wouldn't do it, but I hope your's and Jeremy's prediction about it doesn't come to fruition. Nothing against Dean, I absolutely hope he gets an MLB shot somewhere, heck I wouldn't even mind if he got some mop-up innings for the Twins in 2016. I just don't want us to lock him into a 40-man spot right now, not when we should looking to add talent ourselves via Rule 5, free agency, and waivers.
  16. Otto von Ballpark
    Not really true. The Red Sox gave Ortiz a guaranteed $1.25 million that winter. Jeremy Giambi was a second-time arbitration eligible player that winter too, and he only got $2 mil for 2003 with comparable stats and experience to Ortiz. (Actually Boston traded for Jeremy Giambi and his arbitration salary the day before we released Ortiz.) Also, as an arbitration eligible player, only one-sixth of that contract would have been guaranteed. The Twins could have signed him for $2 mil, and released him in spring training owing him only ~$300k if we wanted (assuming no one else was willing to claim or trade for the full contract). Keeping him at least a little bit longer would have been the more prudent move even without hindsight, considering Ortiz was the same age as LeCroy and they were coming off of 118 and 94 wRC+ seasons, respectively. (And in the second half of 2002, Ortiz was even better -- his ISO ranking 8th, SLG and OPS 11th, and wRC+ 14th in the AL during that time.)
  17. Otto von Ballpark
    How soon we forget Matt Macri. I hate to correct you further, but Hernandez and Correia never made a relief appearance in their Twins careers either. (Ortiz was demoted to relief, and actually Lohse was demoted to AAA too before he could refuse such an assignment.)
  18. Otto von Ballpark
    Ridiculous? Dean had a nice ERA, but it's considered a pitcher's league. Just among qualifiers, he was behind 38 year old Randy Wolf, Michael Bowden, and someone named Greg Smith. The top 15 is pretty much a who's who of non-prospects except Henry Owens and Erik Johnson -- you can even find former Twins property Scott Diamond and Kyle Davies in that group: http://www.fangraphs.com/minorleaders.aspx?pos=all&stats=pit&lg=2&qual=y&type=0&season=2015&team=0&players=0&sort=5,a This is without even considering peripherals and FIP. Also, Rule 5 is generally a place where teams grab talented guys who have underwhelming recent minor league stats, not a place to target guys whose recent minor league stats likely outpaced their talent. I'd be shocked if Dean was selected, and will be disappointed if the Twins protect him. Not only could it also leave someone else unprotected, but it could prevent us from making our own Rule 5 selection, and perhaps most importantly, ties up a 40-man spot likely for the whole 2016 season that we could use on waiver claims.
  19. Otto von Ballpark
    Morneau somehow slashed his K% to a career low at age 33. For all the talk about needing to hit for power, I'd love to see what Mauer could do by reducing his K% back to his early career levels.
  20. Otto von Ballpark
    Good point. Even with our college reliever draft strategy not starting in earnest until 2012, that's not a good record. (And not many of them look like they will start 2016 relieving in AAA either.)
  21. Otto von Ballpark
    Technically, Ortiz's 40-man roster spot immediately went to Rule 5 draft pick Jose Morban, who we lost on waivers when attempting to return him to his original team after spring training. But yeah, Ortiz's presumed DH spot in 2003 went to Matthew LeCroy. Actually if you dig further, you will notice LeCroy spent at least two-thirds of the 2002 season on the 25-man roster, so he was already basically part of the team. In that light, Ortiz's 25-man roster spot in 2003 could be considered to have gone to Chris Gomez, as we generally did not employ a second utility infielder in 2002.
  22. Otto von Ballpark
    Somehow, I doubt they'd use the term "high six figures" to describe "a penny short of $1M" but feel free to believe otherwise. Personally, I'd also call anything at or above $750k to be "high six figures" in this context. If he stays in the US, either on the Twins 40-man roster or claimed by another team for their 40-man roster, he would make $82,000 a year in the minors. I don't think his spouse would need employment at that sum (although his spouse probably already had employment given his earlier minor league salaries, and probably wouldn't sacrifice said employment for any short-term baseball gig regardless of salary). FWIW, Albers did not have a spouse at the time. "Albers’ family and his girlfriend Laura Desjardins from the Toronto area — the pair met a few years ago at the annual Baseball Canada banquet — made the long trip from Saskatchewan and Ontario to Korea." http://www.torontosun.com/2014/12/19/canadian-albers-seeks-permanent-home-with-blue-jays
  23. Otto von Ballpark
    I understand the Twins aren't literally forcing anyone to go to Asia, but they do seem to be pushing it more than other clubs. They may not be giving the player an accurate representation of their chances and opportunities if they stay in the states. Notice how they're only selling these players without sending them through waivers? (At least, without sending them through waivers without the gentlemen's agreement among MLB clubs not to claim players headed to Asia?) It might look more proper if the Twins let the player clear waivers first, without any agreement for him to sign in Asia, then outrighted them if unclaimed. If it is their first outrighting, the Twins would still retaining their rights for the year. Then, only after MLB clubs have had an honest chance at claiming the player, you should reach an agreement to let the player sign in Asia. You risk the player being claimed by another club, and that club potentially getting the sale benefits, but that money probably isn't even a drop in the bucket of MLB finances and shouldn't be much consideration here.
  24. Otto von Ballpark
    If you don't have room on your 40-man, and you choose not to make room, the player would have to pass through waivers and be outrighted anyway. Otherwise, I suspect you would be able to make room for a newly-acquired player and add them to your 40-man roster, thus giving them Rule 5 protection, at any time. (The player you drop from the 40-man would then have to pass through waivers and be exposed to Rule 5 if unclaimed.)
  25. Otto von Ballpark
    Thanks for the info on Dean, Seth. If they protect Dean, after leaving Gilmartin unprotected last winter, I think that will indeed be crazy. Nothing against him, but Dean is 2 years older than Gilmartin was last year (and still a year older than Gilmartin in absolute terms too), not to mention the obvious performance differences.
×
×
  • Create New...