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
    They both had spring training time with Rick Anderson. I'm ducking.
  2. bird
    This. The five best starters (all superior now to a broken Pelfry) in Rochester this year (May, Johnson, Meyer, Darnell, and yes, Diamond) would likely perform better than last year's Twins starters did. It's just a matter of time, and our worst starter will likely be May and not Correia, who we recall was the best SP in last year's rotation.
  3. bird
    Darnell, Taylor Rogers, and maybe DJ Baxendale are the only starters above A ball that are considered to be decent prospects. Keep in mind that drafted assets were swapped for Meyer and May. There are a number of prospective relievers above A ball with a chance, led by Tonkin. But, to answer the question, absolutely they are finding (and drafting) good pitchers! Restricting the answer to AA and AAA will perhaps rather conveniently cloud the answer, because one eliminates close to two dozen (!!) high-ceiling pitchers that are keys to an accurate answer to the question. Stewart, Berrios, Thorpe, Gonsalves, Romero, Jorge, Eades, Slegers, Lee, Duffey, Landa, Jones, and even Wimmers...that's a dozen, and it's an enviable collection. We can name another dozen relievers, guys like Melotakis, Zach Jones, Gilbert, Boer...and they haven't given up on Bard and Chargois, those college RP's they selected apparently because they were looking for injured college RP's at the time.
  4. bird
    The Twins like Sloppy Butterfinger's makeup.
  5. bird
    Fair enough ashbury, it's your ball. But you know, when several people "take the bait", what's wrong with allowing a little leeway? You'll note that as the first one "baited" by a commenter regurgitating the GM retrospective stuff, my attempt was to steer the conversation to a quick discussion point about others who deserve credit. Is that not more relevant to the topic than the standard mindless crediting of all things to some past or present GM as if the rest of the organization is impotent?
  6. bird
    And we can also draw whatever conclusions we want by ignoring facts, mike. It is a fact that international budgets are pre-set, and that "spending patterns" are a function of the budget. The international scouting and signing process has been the subject of many articles, so we have common knowledge that a myriad of individuals play a much more vital role in the process than Smith did and Ryan does. This cannot be reasonably disputed. Of course you can conclude that Smith played a role, that's a "well duh" conclusion. But judge it from all the facts, mike. If we choose not to ignore the reality of how the international scouting and signing process plays out, then I think we have to conclude that the GM's role is not nearly as important as some choose to assert.
  7. bird
    I believe you're perpetuating a common myth here. Billy Smith had less to do with the final contracts than you assume. In fact, he was not the central figure in any of these negotiations. Furthermore, the overall budget for international expenditures was established well before Guerrero or Norstetter or any of the other international scouts talked contract with any of these guys. As for the constantly-touted notion that Smith was a big risk-taker and spender, and that Ryan would have screwed the pooch on these deals, exactly what proof or basis (other than your own perception of Ryan's "history") do any of you have to back this notion up? How do you know that Smith didn't balk at the Sano contract showdown? Maybe he was pushed into pulling the trigger because of the urging and firm advice of, oh, say Ryan? Maybe Pohlad encouraged him to be aggressive. In any event, you can be sure that others weighed in rather heavily, that other opinions carried more weight than Smith's, and that there was consensus about very one of these signings that started with the international scouting people, migrated to the full scouting organization, and only eventually made its way to the GM.
  8. bird
    That's my suspicion too.
  9. bird
    I agree with all this, but given the material he had to work with, would you have settled on Presley and Parmelee instead. I think I would have, but that's probably a product of my distaste for the whole veteran leadership schpiel. I mean, Mr. Gardenhire, if you're so desperate for veteran leadership, turn the keys over to Molitor and join a summer bowling league.
  10. bird
    But I believe it's a fallacy to pass that off as the logic. Saying they passed on free agents to hold roster spots for minor leaguers, spycake, is at best simple not true. And also your "2 decent position players in 2015" is a bit ungenerous, don't you think? Of the 9 positions, I count 5 that may very well be held by "decent" (in most observers' view) players in 2014, let alone 2015, although I grant you that one or two might fizzle. I'm not sure who YOUR two guys are. Mine are Mauer, Dozier, Arcia, Hicks, and Pinto, so that's 5, with Plouffe and Willingham and Kubel being really long shots. And yes, I'm banking on Sano, Buxton and maybe Rosario in 2015, so I'll take my chances with Kubel and Willingham for 2014 and say no to the likes of Kendry Morales, who solves little in the long run. Next off-season? There'll be room for another addition or two that make sense like Nolasco does.
  11. bird
    But the Twins aren't talking about improving the team strictly through the farm system, and I certainly am not. Yes, they have a boatload of holes. One of my favorite memories of all time was living downtown and savoring the 1987 WS championship. And that team had a lot of holes, so don't think in terms of complete perfection here.
  12. bird
    I believe one of the studies looked at 2WAR as its threshhold, but don't recall specifics.
  13. bird
    Can't give you the exact info, but I'm sure others can. I recall BA as being one source, maybe BPro another. The gist in one was tiering the draft, and finding that Players drafted #'s 1-10 were at 75%, 11-20 at just under 50%, and 21-30 a ways below 25%. A second focused on an historical review of past BA Top 100, with breakdowns. I'm basing part of my own optimism on placing 10 prospects still with us on various Top 100 lists over the last two years, all ranked higher than #52 on at least one list, and none of them were named Thorpe, Kepler, Tonkin, May, Santana,Melotakis, Harrison, Polanco, Goodrum, Walker, Jorge, or Gonsalves, all of whom have made somebody's Top 10 Twins prospect list. Add our #5 pick to my reasons for optimism....not immediate wins...optimism.
  14. bird
    you know my vote... A .500 type team and improving in 2015, along with KC, while Detroit hits the skids and the other two remain "competitive".
  15. bird
    What PR department. If there's any area of the business at which the Twins are completely inept, it's in doing PR.
  16. bird
    mikey, mikey, TRUST me, 2014 WILL be better.
  17. bird
    spycake, I gotta call you on the 7 for 8 thing. Studies have been done. Sano, Buxton, Meyer, and Stewart have a beter than 75% shot. If, as appears quite likely, we draft a stud college pitcher, he goes in the same category and 2016 isn't out of the question. At this juncture, will you concede that among Arcia, Pinto, Hicks,Gibson, and Tonkin, we can go 3 for 5? And then, there is a group, maybe a half dozen or so, of at 50/50 and an equal number at about 25%. Plouffe and Parmelee were 25% types. We might have 20 prospects more highly regarded than they were in AA. FA's will regard the Twins as a viable option soon. And yes, I DO wonder why some of you look like pessimists compared to cmath.
  18. bird
    You don't think players and their agents do a critical analysis of an opportunity with massive career ramification?
  19. bird
    But not every job is the same, Mr. Brooks. I can tell you that at every job I had since I was 20 years old, my bosses, shareholders, and loyal customers did not expect immediate results. But they sure wanted progress reports.
  20. bird
    I respect the viewpoint and understand the frustration. I also recognize we're beating a dead horse most likely. But I think the primary distinction is about what goals we have as fans versus what the organization has established as reasonable goals and a reasonable timetable. I really think Ryan and company are looking at a 25-win problem, guys. We as fans tend to wrestle around about 2WAR decisions. They spent $84M to rectify a horrible pitching situation, and yet we're debating as to whether we'll see 68 wins or 72 wins this year. So sure, if they signed Cruz, Morales, Drew, or whomever, and spent another $84M, would we be looking at contending? And at what future cost? So sure, their needs matched the available talent, but to what end? 82 wins? And I totally disagree that they're taking a singular approach. They're taking action internationally, through the draft, though FA, and to a much lesser extent for what should be the obvious reason that they lack trade chips still, through trades. And as for the notion that they're selling the future? First, we are not witnessing the Twins pounding their chest out there. They've been pretty forthright and humble about the situation if we're looking at this fairly, IMO. Second, what else would you sell if really about all you had to sell was the future? I think they're fully aware of the short-term hit they're going to take, revenue-wise.
  21. bird
    I couldn't agree more. Accountability ultimately at the top, and based on results. Many of us have worked at large organizations, and we have learned the results are not always immediate, usually slower than anticipated, the path is littered with small setbacks, and the journey is filled with moments of doubt about whether it's on course. To look only at the W/L record as the only meaningful gauge of progress is everyone's prerogative. I choose to look at the larger picture, see progress, and question whether a GM change right now would improve the situation. This front office, IMO, is not shirking from accountability.
  22. bird
    Who wudda thunk that you'd prefer Johnson, Gilmartin, and Darnell over Worley as your 6th starter? But the depth, while not great, is better, with Deduno and Swarzak avaiklable for a spot start and Meyer next in line most likely.
  23. bird
    I'm also a member of the 1961 Club. There have been a lot of teams over the years that have been close to unbearable to watch. Last year was up there in this category, and I hate to say it, but I'm likely to have the game on as background noise a whole lot in 2014. There are just too many players that are about as fun to watch as Hal Narragon. (Remember him, Halsey?) BUT...the minor league pipeline is better than any I've seen in the past, and MUCH better at that. I loved watching Gaetti, Hrbek, Puckett and gang flounder before they figured it out, so I'm not stressed about 2015 and beyond. I remember some very uninteresting teams when our Top 10 prospect pipeline included Eric Lis, David Winfree, and Doug Deeds. So, I'll take what I can get in 2014 and follow the system, because I'm completely confident that we have exceptional quality coming in waves. Yes, other teams have talent too, but very few have more than we do.
  24. bird
    I'm thrilled.
  25. bird
    And let's not get carried away wi9th Tonkin either. He was brought up as one of many examples of good results. And the argument wasn't that there aren't plenty of examples of bad results. I found it humorously ironic that I was trying to suggest looking at the whole body of work rather than jumping on the Worley case as an example of incompetence. One of the many names I raised was Tonkin, and the next comment was about him in isolation, with a view expressed that finding and developing him was just dumb luck. But, of course, finding Buxton was just dumb luck too. A monkey could get that pick right. Missing on Levi Michael with the 31st pick though? Now hey, that's incompetence. These are sentiments that have been expressed here.
×
×
  • Create New...