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
    Sipp was terrific last year, but he was actually solid the year prior too, and also for a year or two earlier in his career with Cleveland (although much wilder then). If teams thought 2015 was "real", he'd probably get more than 3/21. FWIW, MLBTR predicts he stays in Houston with a 3 year $12 mil contract, which isn't that much more AAV than what the Twins paid Duensing last year ($2.7 mil) I don't know if relievers are that much different than other free agents, as far as reliably predicting future performance. Teams look at age, peripherals, track record, and upside in much the same ways, and the fact that these guys seem to hover around the modest commitment of 3/15 on the open market is a reflection of their roles and the realities of variable performance. A guy from last year that stood out was Zach Duke -- he really came out of nowhere to have a great relief season in Milwaukee. He got 3/15 because teams knew that one season wasn't "real" but it suggested he had joined the club of decent FA relievers in that price range.
  2. Otto von Ballpark
    No problem, you caught it before it was faxed to the league office. With Segura, that would be a very compelling trade from Milwaukee's standpoint. Actually not so good for the Twins anymore (I really don't care for Segura and would have no idea what to do with him). Which demonstrates the difficulty of crafting these proposals!
  3. Otto von Ballpark
    Did you see my post above? Straight from the source, Murphy has to win "a job" out of spring training just to "divide the catching a little bit more", which is a long way from Murphy being the nominal starter in 2016 or cutting Suzuki's playing time in half.
  4. Otto von Ballpark
    I suspect it's about BABIP, pretty much. Murphy's probably not a true talent .365 BABIP hitter (career minor league BABIP of .296), and significantly improving K% is very difficult in MLB (as we've witnessed repeatedly on the Twins). As it is, Steamer has him pegged for a steady BB%, a modest improvement in K%, and an uptick over his already decent power, and he still drops to an 84 wRC+ due to BABIP. Remember, it's a projection, not a prediction. Just an interesting way of quantifying expectations, maybe reflecting a bit of the teams' thinking on these guys as well.
  5. Otto von Ballpark
    MLBTR projects Plouffe to get $7.7 mil this winter in arbitration, could push $10 mil next winter. Probably the same as Todd Frazier will earn (guaranteed $7.5 mil in 2016, then arb eligible for 2017). They also predict Freese to ultimately get 3/30 from a market including the Angels, White Sox, and Indians, although they note the third year as possible due to the lack of a qualifying offer -- maybe 2/24 is in play if the QO effect is overblown for him... Would it be better for us to see our division rivals shut out at 3B upgrades, or to see them to take the top FA option off the board for the Angels? I'm not sure we get any strong offers for Plouffe as long as Freese is on the market.
  6. Otto von Ballpark
    Again, Nolasco has negative trade value right now. If you include him and his any part of his $24 mil remaining, you'd basically have to give Plouffe away.
  7. Otto von Ballpark
    The poster was referring to the period around the actual Greinke trades (2011-2012). Referring to Hicks as "the top prospect" in the deal should have been the dead giveaway, as Hicks hasn't really been considering a prospect since 2013.
  8. Otto von Ballpark
    To be fair, this "bet" is on two different things: Hicks being notably above average for his position, and Murphy being average for his. You could actually lose that bet on Hicks and still have him equal or exceed Murphy's contribution.
  9. Otto von Ballpark
    At its extremes, obviously you can give anybody the "take" sign against Shooter Hunt and Rick Ankiel at their worst. But it's not all clear Runtzler is in that extreme. Based only on these numbers, it's possible Runztler changed his pitch selection and approach in indy ball, as he didn't really gain a lot of additional strikeouts or allow significantly fewer hits as you might expect against inferior competition. If he used his old approach, maybe he would have had 14 K/9, 4 H/9, and 5 BB/9 or something. But who knows if the new approach will help him and to what degree back in affiliated ball. Still, I'll drop it as I agree with the rest, it's a good signing, and thanks for bringing it to our attention!
  10. Otto von Ballpark
    No, it's not the only way at all. You have rate stats which you can adjust for small sample component outliers. (I too didn't bring up WAR, and haven't actually seen the WAR projections you refer to, but that's what they should be doing behind the scenes on a player level.) I think some player's counting stat projections at Fangraphs are a little messed up right now, but the rate stat projections look accurate. Steamer projected wRC+ is 84 for Murphy, and 97 for Hicks. If they are full-time average defenders at their positions, they are probably pretty close, which means we are probably in agreement on whatever points we were making but I sure enjoy typing. See my post above, though, that expecting Murphy to be anything close to a full-time catcher in 2016 might be optimistic, unfortunately...
  11. Otto von Ballpark
    That is a concern from me too. Over at MLB.com, I found this: http://m.twins.mlb.com/news/article/157073666/twins-acquire-john-ryan-murphy-from-yankees Emphasis mine, but I don't think you have to micro-parse this statement to generally support our fear. For 2016, they're looking to lessen the burden on Suzuki with a more viable backup, not find a new starter. (I suspect any possible entreaties to FA catchers went nowhere because of that too.) (Incidentally, I wonder if Antony actually called Murphy "Ryan" or if that's a typo. I don't like being reminded that he is still second in command either...)
  12. Otto von Ballpark
    Brock, you don't "accumulate" "WAR per PA" -- at that point, it's a rate stat, and sample size absolutely matters. A marginal advantage in 2015 WAR per PA, in a sample less than half the size, probably isn't terribly meaningful.
  13. Otto von Ballpark
    Analysis please? A guy like Maloney or Stauffer who fails and gets cut doesn't count much on the negative side of the ledger... but then who replaces them? A guy like Gray or Roenicke who struggles but sticks around doing low-leverage work to keep his WAR from dropping too low -- who takes the higher leverage innings? The Twins bullpen the last 4 years has seen a notable lack of plus performers, which was highlighted in this year's pennant race. I don't know if the Twins current recipe is really working all that well. Targeting a good, high strikeout reliever on a 3/15 type deal seems like it could be a really smart play for the modest commitment involved, unless you know a better way to invest that money.
  14. Otto von Ballpark
    Free agents are overpaid as a group because of baseball's service time structure, and this kind of analysis is always going to make the group look bad due to a few bad eggs. It's particularly bad with relievers and WAR, because great relief seasons often only tally 1 WAR anyway. Looking at your list, the first guy (Affeldt) had an average season, a stellar season, a postseason not included at all in your tally (with Affeldt pitching 11 games/innings without allowing a run or an inherited run to score), and a bad final season when they finished 8 games out of the playoffs anyway. Do the Giants really think they "lost" $24.6 million on that transaction? Also, Cameron concludes that you might as well sign minor league free agents, but he doesn't actually perform any analysis of minor league free agent relievers. Getting a minor league free agent reliever that costs nothing and produces nothing indeed seems better than a negative performance on paper, but what are the odds you actually get a plus performance like Grilli or Soria from a minor league free agent, or even a mixed bag like Affeldt? It only really matters if you think the money could have been invested elsewhere, and given the extremely modest amounts of money we're talking about here relative to MLB payrolls, that's far from clear. $6 mil AAV over 2-3 years is very difficult to better allocate.
  15. Otto von Ballpark
    Depends how you define "potentially high reward" -- I guess when you are dealing with very low costs, any reward at all seems high by comparison, but I'm not sure if TR's record shows many notably high rewards from these types of signings.
  16. Otto von Ballpark
    Yeah, I was going to say this too. The Sugar Land Skeeters competition probably doesn't have anywhere near the pitch recognition or bat speed of affiliated hitters. Lew Ford is an absolute beast in that league. It's definitely better than if he'd have walked 5.5 per 9 down there, but it really doesn't tell us anything about whether he is ready to improve upon his career 5.5 per 9 walk rate in MLB or the affiliated minors. Good signing, though.
  17. Otto von Ballpark
    Interesting, although it does seem to fall into the common trap of piling up 40-man roster guys (I count 4 for the Twins, and 3 for the Brewers, assuming Roache and others are protected in advance of Rule 5). Why the outfielders? Santana projects as a corner guy, but he might be at the top of the Brewers CF depth chart right now, and Walker and Roache seem to cancel each other out for the most part. Also, Goodrum is Rule 5 eligible again and will be a minor league free agent next winter, he doesn't really add much to a trade. I could see Smith alone for part of that package, maybe Polanco + non-40-man prospect like Gonsalves, or Meyer + Rogers + non-40-man prospect, maybe?
  18. Otto von Ballpark
    Not sure. Meyer? Gonsalves? It would basically be the headliner, given our RP prospects. But maybe the Brewers hold on to Smith to bolster a much larger deal, like for Lucroy. (Like the Phillies did with Diekman and Hamels too.) The Brewers are in a weird place. Pretty bad last year, and in a very tough division, but they've got Braun, a few other decent guys, the younger Arcia on the rise, Lucroy for another couple years -- not sure what their plan is, but we haven't seen any aggressive selling yet (Gomez was nearing his walk year, etc.).
  19. Otto von Ballpark
    Also note that Smith still has 4 years of team control left. That 2nd prospect would have to be pretty darn good to pry him from the Brewers right now, because our top RP prospects have looked more like suspects lately (or we'd probably be counting on them to help in 2016).
  20. Otto von Ballpark
    FYI, last I heard Span had surgery which will likely cause him to be out past opening day, probably why the Nationals didn't make him a QO.
  21. Otto von Ballpark
    Brewers have literally no place to play Oswaldo right now, they have both corner OF spots locked in and several of their top prospects are big league ready OFers. And Oswaldo is obviously out of options. They like many other teams might grab him for free on waivers if the opportunity arose, but he just isn't contributing value to a trade with them right now.
  22. Otto von Ballpark
    See my post above.
  23. Otto von Ballpark
    Upton only has 2 years left on his deal, just like Nolasco. And Upton was actually good in limited time last year, not sure it will last but his power was back so he may not be awful the next two years. The way Nolasco's season ended (injury and the ineffective comeback), I might say Melvin Upton is a little more tradeable at the moment. (Meaning, the Padres may not have to eat as much money to unload him, if they so desired.) I don't think they'd trade him straight up for Nolasco right now. They seem to have no trouble finding pitchers and attracting them to Petco. And maybe Upton is the rare guy who can hit for power there.
  24. Otto von Ballpark
    Yeah, the proper complaint might be that we didn't have a better placeholder than Schafer/Robinson. (Rasmus was my choice.)
  25. Otto von Ballpark
    No, they are results that helped him all year. BABIP is the result that only helped in one month (and his month at AAA). And I guarantee the Yankees are looking more at his year long peripherals than his monthly BABIP. No guarantee that he's good, of course he could wind up a low BABIP hitter like Dozier without as much power, but I have a feeling the Yankees are looking at the peripherals and betting otherwise.
×
×
  • Create New...