Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

bird

Verified Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    1,413

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 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 bird

  1. bird
    This just cracks me up. Ummm, any reason you're not starting the lookback to years prior to 2013? Funny stuff.
  2. bird
    Let's try a different analysis of the Royal's history. First of all, the Royals traded prospects to fill holes many times over those 30 years, so let's not pretend they found some secret sauce. But yes, because their home-grown core was primed, the Cueto trade appears to have put them over the top, where Shields only came close. Good for Dayton Moore. For most of those "30 years" of top ten draft choices year after year after year after year, the Royals had a spotty track record It was only in the last decade that a higher percentage of elite draft choices were eventually golden for them. What changed? IMO, the biggest change is that, for almost everyone these days, a top ten pick ends up almost always being golden. Not 100% of the time, as Montgomery I think was one that didn't for them. But it has been this way now for about a decade. Most top ten choices succeed. Also, the Royals benefitted by KEEPING their choices, not by TRADING them as Mike Sixtel implies by citing an exception to this in Will Myers. And thrylos, when Ryan gets to the same place Dayton Moore is, he won't be "dumpster diving" for refuse like Hughes and Ervin Santana. Let's lose that dumb term.
  3. bird
    Really? OK. Knock yourself out.
  4. bird
    It's funny how the bar gets set differently depending on the subject. So, Toronto is a success story, going out in the first round after winning the division. I'm on the record as saying there's more that one way to skin the cat as a GM. What Dombrowski did with the Tigers worked. For awhile anyway. And given the flurry of trades before he was fired, he may have set the Tigers up to be competitive again sooner that most people think, I don't know. Dayton Moore was roundly criticized, brutally at times, including by commenters on TD. Then, his patience was rewarded, as Moose, Cain, Hosmer, Ventura, etc. started to reached their ceilings. As you say, 20 years of rebuilding, and it finally paid off. When you say that KC has learned that you can't rely ONLY on your own prospects, you're obviously trying to say that the Twins don't get this idea. That's just faulty. No team refuses to supplement its roster with players it didn't draft. BTW, Shields did not help them get to the WS this year. But you bring up a good point, which is, before you can TRADE a prized prospect such as Will Myers, you have to POSSESS such a prospect ( a top ten prospect) at a position of surplus. If the Twins get to a place where one final piece is all they need to propel them through and not just TO the playoffs, I think even Ryan will trade for that piece, maybe even from his farm system. Especially now with the extra wild card opportunity that didn't exist before. No need to argue this last point. We all know where we all stand on this.
  5. bird
    You don't bring up the Ray's most recent seasons, and yet you emphasize the Royal's last two seasons and without bringing up the two decades prior to that? Hmmm. I guess you picked YOUR poison. What changed for the Royals? Caringlessness? Any chance it was building for a long long time through the draft instead?
  6. bird
    Kudos to Anthopoulos and Dombroski. Those two people never get way too hung up on prospects. Yes, it's all very good and well to "try" to go for it. But what happens when the GM fails? For sure, Ryan will never "think big" enough to do what those guys did. I don't know the answer to this question, but have there been many (any?) instances where teams have "gone for it" and failed to, say, get into the WS, and then come right back in a year or so as a WS participant?
  7. bird
    Danny needs a hug. I'd hug him.
  8. bird
    This theory is close to implausible. Lots of factors make sense in explaining Meyer's struggles: injury, personal stresses, mechanical problems, coaching, etc. But to blame his poor performance and/or his subsequent fall as a prospect on some imaginary new philosophy imposed by some major regime change? Really?
  9. bird
    When people declare the trade to be a bad one (rather than simply stating the obvious that the trade so far favors Washington), the implication is they're "giving up" on Meyer. Either that, or they're just seizing an opportunity to be critical. So far in this thread, unlike plenty of previous threads, no one appears to have 'given up" completely on Meyer. Citing a prospect's age in a vacuum as if it's a reliable predictor of potential is deficient. Meyer, for example, has specific flaws impeding his progress. His control problems have nothing to do with his age. On the other hand, it's fair to question whether his lack of progress over time is an indication that he's less promising than we originally thought. So, I think when most of us cite "age" as a reason for having a lower opinion on a prospect, we're probably influenced by the prospect's slower rate of progress rather than his actual age.
  10. bird
    If it takes an Ivy League education to fully grasp sabermetrics, we need to turn all the other institutions into homeless shelters and retrain all the Arithmetic Professors so they can capably run a soup kitchen.
  11. bird
    Yer dreamin'. Sano didn't drive in that many runs.
  12. bird
    This list features 3 guys who are trying to climb back into the picture. It reminded me of just how many promising former and present prospects we have that fit in that category: Arcia, Vargas, Santana, Melotakis. Romero, Bard, Pinto, Wimmers, Michael, Chargois, Meyer, and Thorpe. The Twins need 4-5 of these guys to become either part of the future or valuable assets on the trade market.
  13. bird
    Great point.
  14. bird
    I have to disagree, thrylos. What's the crazy part about Tyler Duffey? And exactly which conversion attempts aren't "working out"? The reports are pretty encouraging on Tyler Jay, don't you agree? Melotakis was injured all year. Who else should we discuss that suggests this is all craziness? The jury's still out on most if not all of those experiments, so perhaps the crazy part right now is criticizing the strategy at this stage of the game. Also, you won't be able to find a single source that ever said the strategy was to have all those relievers maintain their velocities as starters. I think you're really reaching to find fault on this subject. Who cares what Duffey's velocity is if he's effective?
  15. bird
    Given all the pros who value Butera as much much more than a BP catcher, shouldn't we question, just a little bit, the use of bWAR as the be-all and end-all when discussing a player's value?
  16. bird
    Because Rogers would have been eaten alive by MLB batters perhaps?
  17. bird
    Yeah, I'm more in this camp. I've been hearing forever how the Verlander's and Sales's are necessary to get you to the postseason, and how the Price's and Arietta's are necessary to advance in the postseason. Signing a FA ace is easy, but so is chopping your hand off with a hatchet. Having TR pay for an ace is admittedly much smarter, but still. I'd be fine with having 4 starters that match up competitively against the opponents' #2,3,and 4 guys. The problem for me is that I'm not confident we have 4 guys under contract will do this for us, except for if they're performing at their peaks for a full season. But I'd avoid the costs and risks. I strongly disagree that money not spend on a long fat contract for an ace will be money never spent elsewhere. If this core group truly comes together, there'll be plenty of opportunities to spend money to keep them. And I'd rather part with assets for things we need, like a catcher, and roll the dice that one or more of Hughes, Gibson, Santana and maybe even Berrios give us solid #2 starter seasons, and that May, Duffey and ?? turn into mid-rotation starters. Jim Kaat was a #2 who gave us a couple #1 seasons. So was Mudcat Grant. And Jim Perry. And Dave Boswell. But not Cole DeVries. Not him.
  18. bird
    Did YOU even read the article, where it "compared" to how OTHER teams "did" in 2015 ONLY by looking at ONE criteria (2.0fWAR)?
  19. bird
    I'm going to give this list an 8 out of 10 in terms of really good names.
  20. bird
    Yeah, the notion of a disconnect among scouts drafting fireballers, Ryan signing "control" FA's, and developers struggling to get the Burdi's of the world to the next level is interesting. One thing that seems to stick out is that guys like Burdi, Jones, and Reed struggled, but not because of reduced velocity. Their problems were more about control, right? So I'm not sure that leads us anywhere.
  21. bird
    Yeah, I thought this was really interesting. Platoon describes it in post #42. It was cryptic and vague insinuation rather than something definitive, but telling nonetheless. Just wish we had a journalist who would pursue the topic.
  22. bird
    Didn't mean to annoy you Hosken. Funny, but I watched a lot of baseball this season and missed every single one of those conversations you're describing here. If I heard Perkins or Gibson say something this inane, I think I would have noticed.
  23. bird
    Steve, You're probably right. If you have heard about this "philosophy" from opposing scouts, from every prospect website and scout talker on the planet, from execs who've been here before, great, I'll take your word for it. Personally, I can't recall ever seeing anything in writing describing this philosophy from a single source who heard it firsthand from the Twins. What are your thoughts about why you haven't heard this philosophy described by someone employed by the Twins?
  24. bird
  25. bird
    I'm still lacking a verifiable explanation for the Twin's low K/9 rate historically. Is it philosophical? Do the results truly confirm some action on their part, or is it attributable at least in part to other factors? The tendency here is to just conclude that the results are evidence of a philosophical direction, and while I can see how the results point to either this or an ineptitude of some sort, I'm still skeptical. I lean towards judging their philosophy on something more than a perception of what their actions have been.
×
×
  • Create New...