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
    I guess I take a more nuanced view of rookies. Royce Lewis and Austin Martin are #! abSo Royce Lewis and Austin Martin are #1 and #5 overall draft selections. Now, if I was suggesting replacing Taylor with Celestino and Taylor with Helman? Then maybe you'd be on to something regarding a 100 loss season, although even THAT change may not result in the disaster you envision, my friend. I mean Castro's 1.8 WAR and Taylor's 1.4 WAR ain't needle-changers.
  2. bird
    You're prolly right. It'd be catastrophic to be without Gallo, Taylor, Farmer, and Kepler. And how could Lewis and Martin POSSIBLY match what Castro and Taylor have produced. Heck, that might be worse than being without Garlick, Celestino, and Contreras! And wait til THIS GM tackles the pitching staff. We're talking 120 losses after that.
  3. bird
    If I'm GM, I pick up next year's option. The difference in cost between Polanco and whomever gets sacrificed (Farmer for THIS GM) is immaterial in the scheme of things. Brooks Lee has been pushed upstream to AAA fast because my field staff believes he has almost no chance to be underwhelming when called up in June and plugged in...at 3rd base. Why there? Because THIS GM is moving BOTH Martin and Lewis to the OF. Kirilloff stays put, Julien gets a 1B glove in case but stays at 2B for now, with Polanco at 3B until he's "relegated" to an INF utility role. Kepler gets traded in the off-season for a couple of low minors prospects (we're gonna lose too many prospects to Rule V as it is, given the heightened awareness of the draft/development skills as a result of the Steer/CES success stories). I want high risk/high reward prospects (think Ariel Castro and Yasser Mercedes of the present and Yunior Severino of the past). So bye bye to Farmer, Gallo, and Taylor for sure, and Castro stays put...for the time being. Buxton needs to sink or swim as a defender, so I throw him to the wolves out here in CF until a wheel comes off. He's not a DH, but hopefully he gets his body and head straight and stops looking like an A-baller at the plate. And if Correa performs like he has, he gets tons of bench time. THIS GM is done having a lineup full of rally killers. I'm hoping Wallner doesn't kill or create on defense too many rallies as a starting RF. Now...if my field staff gets excited about Prato, or Severino, or Gordon's comeback, or Shobel's rise? I'm dangling both Castro AND Polanco at the deadline and moving thenm if I'm offered acceptable prospect talent.
  4. bird
    Actually, Jeffers has Castro beat by .5 WAR. I'd wager that five or more position players pass Castro by in these final 40 games, guys like Julien, Kepler, Correa, Lewis. and maybe even Polanco himself. The caveat to this is staying off the IL.
  5. bird
    How do advanced stats factor in consistency? Or, in the case of these two players, inconsistency? I mean, when a player's valleys are both deep and long, it affects the whole team, right?
  6. bird
    Is Ryan a redundant, internally replaceable asset? No? I rest my case, Your Honor. Trade from surplus! For example, the Twins have a surplus of outfielders performing at below replacement value. A large surplus. And they have a surplus of outfielders that can replace those rally killers with an immediate, albeit incremental performance improvement. Quit thinking about highest trade value. Nelson Cruz did not represent the highest trade value. And he netted us Ryan. Trading a nominal value Cruz for Ryan was smart. Would trading Ryan, in any circumstance, be smart. Yes, if a team was dumb enough to give us TWO mid-to-front rotation guys who are plug and play.
  7. bird
    WSht a rip-off. I want a red baseball cap.
  8. bird
    Would it not then be more logical to fire Terry Francona and Pedro Grifol?
  9. bird
    Young man, I was (checks calendar...uses slide rule...) on my third job in my second career when you matriculated from OHS.
  10. bird
    I know that's a contrarian position, but yes, for the most part.
  11. bird
    It's certainly understandable to dislike the Arraez trade, but I think you're possibly being too harsh on Lopez, and it's a bit premature to close the case on this trade. For one, Lopez has made 12 starts and pitched 71 innings so far, and that has value in and of itself. Moreover, Salas is ranked #12 among Twins prospects by Fangraphs and Chourio #23, with 45FV and 40 FV respectively.
  12. bird
    Yeah, I agree that "surplus" prospects should be advantageously traded, but I'd try to make those trades in the off-season rather than at the trade deadline where the trading partner holds the leverage as the "seller". It rarely happens, and I don't know why, but when a team's system becomes top-heavy with Rule 5 risks and a lack of room on the 40-man roster, why would it not make sense to find a trading partner that needs prospects that are close to MLB-ready in exchange for low-minor prospects? The further from the majors a prospect is, the bigger the discount due to that distance, meaning at least theoretically the low minor guys should have a talent edge over those AAA and AA guys.
  13. bird
    If I were the GM, I'd have a steadfast rule: never, ever, under any circumstance whatsoever, be a buyer at the trade deadline, and I'd ALWAYS be a seller if possible. The FO did a bit better this season at adding bodies to plug into the BP, guys like Brock Stewart. I'd never trade assets for RP's like Pagan and Lopez, but I WOULD look to trade MLB guys like Kepler for minor league prospects like Ryan, Alcala, and Duran whenever possible. Some will work out and some will not. But it seems like the odds favor sellers big time. In short, my philosophy/strategy would be to live with your off-season decisions, regardless of the standings, and trade MLB surplus for minor league prospects every chance you get to leverage another team's desperation, hopefully getting an overpay.
  14. bird
    Thanks for the heads-up, Mike. Some random observations: Last year's list had 40 prospects at 35+ or higher. Given the fact that we traded five guys off that list for MLB assets, and given the fact that another nine guys were dropped, and given the fact that another five guys graduated, I'm really pleasantly surprised that the system has produced 36 prospects at 35+ or higher. That bodes well. Lots of exciting new names, especially from the IFA ranks. The prominent drops were Cavaco, Sabato, Urbina, Enlow, and Soularie. I'm disappointed that Enlow is not grading out well. Personally, when I compare systems, I ignore prospects with less than a 40FV. And yet, two 35+ names off last year's list are contributing in MLB now: Jovani Moran and shockingly Yennier Cano at age 29.
  15. bird
    rwilfong86, thanks for the report. Reports from the community are one of the many joys of Twins Daily.
  16. bird
    Baseball Reference shows Kwan now at 6.0 WAR and the Guardians with 7.2 WAR collectively and cumulatively. Again, so far.
  17. bird
    It's way, way too early to fully analyze the 2018 draft, or the 2017 draft for that matter, I suppose we get a few clues when we look at which teams, so far, have generated the highest collective and cumulative WAR. I took a look at that. At this early juncture, 8 teams have generate a negative WAR. The Twins are in the top half of the 30 teams with 3.1 WAR (they were top 5 so far in 2017). All of the positive WAR came from Jeffers and Larnach as one would expect. One might also suspect that the Rays have generated the highest WAR so far, 12.3. This surprised me: one would think that teams drafting within the first 10 picks in the 1st and each subsequent round would have generated superior WAR numbers. Not so. Only the Tigers and the Reds have good numbers. The other 8 are well below average, every one of them lower than the Twins' 3.1 WAR.
  18. bird
    My prediction, for the two cents it's worth, is that Royce Lewis will have the highest cumulative WAR when all is said and done, and it won't even be close.
  19. bird
    It should be noted that Drew Rassmussen was selected by the Rays but did not sign. The following year he was a 6th round choice of Arizona, who then traded him to the Rays. So when comparing 2017 draft results, his stats don't count.
  20. bird
    If Royce Lewis blossoms, the draft is a success. If he doesn't, it's a bad draft despite Ober. One thing I wonder: the old adage was that if three prospects contributed from a Rule 4 draft, you did okay. Given all the changes in the draft and development world, what should today's adage be? I mean, I'm looking at a lot of drafts where a few more than three become respectable contributors.
  21. bird
    Lewis appears to be an adequate SS. Maybe Correa goes to 3rd and Lewis takes SS?
  22. bird
    1) Royce Lewis 2)E. Rodriguez 3)Brooks Lee 4)Austin Martin 5)Varland 6)Prielipp 7)Mercedes 8)Raya 9)Julien 10)Enlow 11)Festa 12)Wallner 13)SWR 14)Henriquez 15)Headrick 16) Balazovic 17)Canterino 18) Miller 19) Sands 20) J. Rodriguez
  23. bird
    Yes, in retrospect it does. For example, at the time of the trade, our pals at Fangraphs had a 40 FV on Steer and Hajjar, and CES did not even warrant a 35FV in their book, probably because they saw the huge K numbers and saw him at best as a mediocre 1B a la Sabato. So, in their minds at least, all three were projected to be "Up and down" guys or bench players. Certainly, one or more of those three could defy the considerable odds and become better than a replacement player. But likewise, Mahle could recover nicely, sign an extension, and be a solid mid-rotation guy and/or valuable trade asset.. In other words, the jury is out on this trade, but the early testimony is damning for sure.
  24. bird
    Yeah, I don't understand why this idea isn't a lot more common. I mean, if a couple months of Nelson Cruz can fetch Joe Ryan, Gordon might be able to get a couple of lottery tickets in return. I'b be a lousy GM, because I'd pretty much ignore where we are in the standings and look to trade players with marginal utility whenever a more promising replacement was surfacing in AAA. So, yeah, at the deadline, I'm dangling Gordon, Kepler, Pagan, Gallo, Solano, and maybe even Miranda, none of whom are likely difference-makers and all of whom can probably be adequately replaced by Lewis, Julien, Wallner, Garlick (for now), some combo of Sands, Henriquez, Headrick et al in relief, maybe Lee and Austin Lee when rosters expand... I say trade trade trade and hope for another Joe Ryan, Jhoan Duran or three. Ignore the standings. Polanco goes over the winter if Lee looks ready to stick.
  25. bird
    I believe you and Roger are reading things into this decision that simply aren't there. First of all, Joe has been under Uncle Jim's mentorship for a long time. Probably still is, to a small extent. Secondly, I don't know what's so different about THIS decision versus many others that were made pre-Joe. I don't see any evidence at all that there's been a change in philosophy, strategy, tactics, financial circumstance, etc. Third, like when Jim was in Joe's place, Falvey and Levine, relying on their own baseball people in analytics, development, scouting, and medical, are operating with a great deal more authority and leeway than a lot of people think. Joe Pohlad may not even been called into a meeting on this, but yeah, they probably gave him a courtesy heads up lol.
×
×
  • Create New...