Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

bird

Verified Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    1,413

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Profiles

News

Minnesota Twins Videos

2026 Minnesota Twins Top Prospects Ranking

2022 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks

Minnesota Twins Free Agent & Trade Rumors, Notes, & Tidbits

Guides & Resources

2023 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks

The Minnesota Twins Players Project

2024 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks

2025 Minnesota Twins Draft Pick Tracker

Forums

Blogs

Events

Store

Downloads

Gallery

Everything posted by bird

  1. bird
    Yeah, that 19 year drought between 30 HR players is almost as unfathomable as what's going on now. Almost.
  2. bird
    I'm guessing that call has been made. Would love it if this was in the works.
  3. bird
    You'll also like the fact that he can't watch TV without parental guidance.
  4. bird
    I don't think the talent evaluators would put Balazovic and Vallimont in the same value category.
  5. bird
    I'm not sure if it's an overpay or not. The FO guy for the Marlins described Diaz as "the best left-handed power hitter in the minor leagues", hyperbole most likely, but if not, it's an overpay. I believe the MLB pipeline report on Vallimont mentioned that he hit 98MPH on the gun at some point in a short stint at Mercyhurst, so who knows, maybe our amateur scouts, who have some history with that DII program, have a book on Vallimont that makes them think he can be developed into something. We should cheer for this FO to be aggressive traders. We have lived with a long history of passivity. Of letting prospects run their course and become free agents, get scooped up via Rule 5, or have the luster fade. Our own people should be the first to know. We should be better at trading a guy like Oswaldo Arcia before the rest of the league ALSO sees that his knucklehead syndrome is a limiting factor. I want a FO that's not afraid to lose a trade here and there.
  6. bird
    The PTBNL will be a 145 pound 16 year old kid from the D.R. that will eventually make Luis Arraez look like a soccer player. That's how these things always play out.
  7. bird
    Which hardly qualifies as a fleece job.
  8. bird
    This team concerns me more than I care to admit.
  9. bird
    This is patently false, Mike. I'm assuming we're talking about the IFA allotment? The CBA is a contractual agreement. If you read the old CBA contract carefully, you'll understand that teams agreed to not go over. That was the intent. I understand that 23 teams elected to breach their agreement. But they did in fact originally agree to abide by a contractual agreement to adhere to the allotment system. Apparently, your understanding was that there was no contract, and no agreement, just some arbitrary "rule" that said, "hey, go ahead and go over your allotment, but we're gonna charge you extra." It's a moot point now, because they cleaned up the language and stiffened the penalties as a reminder to organizations that it ain't a pay for privilege thing, and breaching faith with the other teams is cheating.
  10. bird
    I realize this is the almost universal belief around here. But it was a contractual agreement. The original intent was crystal clear, even though the language in the contract was poorly written. The penalty provisions were poorly designed. This allowed teams to rationalize the original intent away and dismiss their breach of faith with the non-cheating teams and instead treat it as a "pay for privilege" thing. They tightened it up and made the penalties onerous to eradicate the cheating. This by an organization which is not exactly reputed for its virtuous ethical behavior. My point was, if an organization's ethics demanded it comply with the intent and terms of that CBA contract and refuse to blow through their agreed-to allotment, then presuming they did so for another reason, like frugality, is, well, presumptuous.
  11. bird
    Will do, Chief. Any requests about what he should tell United Properties to do?
  12. bird
    But isn't this history irrelevant in 2019?
  13. bird
    Can anyone tell me if anyone has asked why the organization elected to honor their agreement with the other clubs to adhere to the agreed-upon system and not harm other clubs by breaching their agreement? Is there any chance, whatsover, that management decided to stay within allotment limits for a reason other than that they're frugal?
  14. bird
    I get why you'd paint this picture, but I think it's more than blurred. It's mostly a false read. The Pohlad Companies are not some small, unsophisticated affair. As with every other one of their businesses, they expect management to adhere to very clearly laid out disiplines and to comply with standard practices regarding corporate governance. Businesses the size of, say, United Properties or Minnesota Twins Baseball, to name two of the Pohlad Companies' 30 businesses, will always have a governance control that requires management to present potential expenditures of a certain amount to the board of directors. That's all that's going on. People love to opine (and to believe) a narrative that equates running expenditures by "Jim Pohlad" as clear evidence of cheapness or an unwillingness to invest additional cash (it ain't spending, folks!) when management views it as a prudent investment. So yes, these are business decisions, absolutely. You are entitled to believe Minnesota Twins Baseball as a billion dollar business shouldn't be run like a business. But we're not entitled to that. I personally get tired of the cheap and the not wanting to win and the stuffing it in his own pocket stuff.Yes, the three boys are the majority shareholders and major beneficiaries of any profitability. But I promise you, if you spent any time at all around them ( I have), you'd see that they care about the welfare of their thousands of employees, all the other shareholders, their community, and even you. As for your cynical PR bit, I'd tell you that Jim Pohlad hardly knows how to spell it. He's only slightly better at avoiding PR blunders than the old man was.
  15. bird
    I'm very much concerned that you're correct. One of the things that concerns me is the abysmal record in the DSL. They have concentrated investments there, in Javier and Urbina, maybe hoping others will slip past the competition. But Im wondering, like with everything else, the playing field doesn't let one team out-scout or out-hustle like it used to. I theorize that the only real chance one team has to be sustainably superior to anyone else now wrests in an ability to be an opportunistic horse-trader.
  16. bird
    Yeah, I get a kick out of looking back at the names. My original "Deeds" response was mostly meant to inject some fun nostalgia into things, but secondarily to question any thoughts of a time where Kubel, Bartlett, Baker, Crain, et al could be thought of as the "salad days" of the system. There may be an equal number of flame-outs on this 2019 list as we can count on lists from 2005-6-7, but the difference is where comparable names show up in the rankings. To illustrate a point, let's theoretically equate some names: Garrett Jones, our 5th best prospect in 2005? Was he that much of a better prospect than 2019's #39 guy Zander Wiel? Alex Romero at #7 in 2006. Higher ceiling than #26 Celestino? #7 David Winfree versus #35 Jaylin Davis? #9 Trent Oeltjen compared to #36 Gabriel Maciel? #20 Juan Portes and #27 Luke Raley? 2019 may or may not be the salad days, I don't know, but two things seem evident to me. The first is that even if all the 2019 guys listed above fail, a better prospect is occupying the slots at #5, #7, #9, and #20 here in 2019. And second, I'm quite confident that the NEXT 40 names we could mention here in 2019 are more promising than what we'd be looking at in a similar list of names from 2007. Oh, and Doug Deeds? If you go out to B-Ref and read his Wiki profile, you'll see that Seth had him on the radar for good reason. It's also instructive, because we tend to get overly excited with stats like what Deeds put up. It really is an impressively deep system.
  17. bird
    Oh, Deeds was a thing, but I prolly should have referenced David Winfree instead to refute the notion of salad days of the past compared to this list. Winfree checked in at #7 on Seth's list in 2007. And probably earned his spot! On second thought, maybe Trent Oeltjen at #9 and Winnie should have swapped spots.
  18. bird
    Really? When I look down this current list, I see a dozen or so who are having absolutely stellar years. And Doug Deeds wouldn't make this list if you doubled the number of top prospects, wouldn't you agree?
  19. bird
    Geez, how old are you, ten? Heck, I remember a time when Doug Deeds made the top 10 and the best we could do was WISH he was abysmal due to injury.
  20. bird
    I don't have an opinion about which of Arraez and Gordon is ultimately going to have the better MLB career. But today, with odds, I'd take the Gordon side of a sizable bet.
  21. bird
    It's always been a relationship-building exercise rather than a pure scouting and signing exercise in the D.R. That's why MacPhail, Smith, and Jim Pohlad badgered old Carl until he finally coughed up the multi-million dollar budget in the 90's that allowed the Twins to finally and very slowly establish a beachhead in the D.R. This required both human and physical infrastructure. It began with building relationships and a good reputation with those buscones who were what you might call beneficent exploiters. It culminated in the establishment of that fabulous 45-acre facility jointly operated by the Twins and McPhail's Phillies. Kids who live and train there receive educational and cultural benefits as well as on-field training and development. The various Top IFA prospect lists have always been a bit of a farce once you get past a few extraordinary athletic specimens. But it's not a complete crapshoot either, despite the immaturity of the prospects. Teams with reputable and honest relationships and a physical presence like the Twins will be privy to what's going on outside of their own complex. They see these kids up close and interact with them over time because of their relationships with the buscones. Dicey stuff happens, but not all teams are cutting deals. Sometimes it's simply a buildup of trust that a buscone is transparent and that a club will take a modicum of care in their treatment of a kid.
  22. bird
    I'm guessing that Seth and others will reiterate that the DSL and GCL stats need to be taken with a grain of salt. There are tons of examples of prospects statistically shining and then disappearing quickly. But I'll bet they also have a long list of names they're sort of dreaming on, hoping to see a continuation of positive things as they get to and then past advanced rookie status. My guess as to some names similar to Escobar, guys who haven't cracked their Top 40 list, names that these guys are watching very closely: Berroa, Leach, Breek, Shulfer, Teng, Winder, Rijo, and maybe Schick, Moises Gomez, Moran. My pick to click is Erasmo Moreno. Maybe later this summer, we'll see an article entitltled "Unranked Pitching Prospects to Watch" or something. Part II: Position Players.
  23. bird
    Well hells bells, now that you put it that way...you convinced me (although Belisle helped!) and now not giving Nick Anderson a chance was worse than not getting anything in return. (Well, we got Brian Schales) Wouldn't you love it if some access media type corralled our Development Director and quizzed the bejesus out of him on these decisions? Not to call them out so much, because you and I know mistakes are inevitable and forgivable, but because it would be fascinating to know a lot more about their thought process, their philosophy, their strategy, and what goes into decisions to just let a guy like Nick Anderson walk with no real return on your considerable investment in his increased value.
  24. bird
    Terrific post.
  25. bird
    I think you're probably right, that it wasn't a "we're not competing" thing, but rather a "guess he was more valuable than we thought" thing.
×
×
  • Create New...