Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

Woof Bronzer

Verified Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    1,093

  • 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 Woof Bronzer

  1. Woof Bronzer
    The Athletic's business model is quite explicitly to destroy local sports pages, and they've been very successful at it. Gleeman knew this when he took the job and seemed completely fine with it until it began to affect him personally, so I'm having a hard time mustering up any tears for Gleeman. "Sure, I took a job with Eliminate Local Sports Journalism Inc., but I never thought I they'd eliminate ME!" Keep doing what you're doing, Twins Daily. And whatever you do, don't sell out to a private equity firm or hedge fund or Athletic or any other of these vultures who believe to their core that profit is the only thing that ever matters in life.
  2. Woof Bronzer
    Yep Correa is the 2nd highest paid position player on our roster.
  3. Woof Bronzer
    Why do folks not want to talk about who we got in this trade? Surely you understand that's how trades work. You can't just say "Polanco wasn't great for Seattle so it was a good trade." Polanco had 1.2 WAR in 2024. In return we got 2 1/3 innings out of Topa and literally nothing else. According to you 2025 is irrelevant to evaluating the trade, so looking solely at 2024, how in the world is this a good trade? I am not sure why 2026 counts in evaluating this trade, but if you think Polanco has been bad, you should check out Topa's numbers! It wasn't the worst trade in Twins history, probably not in the top 100. But trading a guy for several worse players in order to cut a few million dollars from the payroll is a terrible strategy and should not be celebrated. This organization desperately needs to acquire better players, not worse ones. Of course, there's a chance Gonzalez becomes a star and leapfrogs Jenkins, ERod, and the other dozen or so outfielders ahead of him on the depth chart. That would change the view of the trade.
  4. Woof Bronzer
    This is a very interesting response. I notice you left off the other players that we also got. How come? The Twins cut $30 mil the offseason they traded Polanco. They pocketed the savings from the Polanco trade. You know this, of course. "Top prospect" yes I agree Gonzalez has done nothing to help the Twins. Interesting framing. I am gobsmacked by the people defending this trade? You can think Polanco was overpaid for his production and also acknowledge the factual reality that they got a terrible return in the trade. It's really ok to think both things are true.
  5. Woof Bronzer
    Whereas YOU would lead this hypothetical team to a pennant, amirite?
  6. Woof Bronzer
    Yeah that one. Who did they get for this "poor performing player", and how did those players perform? And who did the Twins sign with the savings from his "expensive" contract?
  7. Woof Bronzer
    Do you think setting a payroll number impacts roster decisions? For example, if T3 would have given Zoll an extra $15mil for the bullpen, would the bullpen look differently? Man I've become accustomed to strange Pohlad water-carrying over the years but insisting that T3 is a blameless absentee owner is just bizarre and counterfactual. He has literally said he's an active owner! You don't seem to grasp that there is much more to building a roster than picking up the phone and calling agents lol.
  8. Woof Bronzer
    Tom doesn't make roster decisions, but he fired Falvey because he didn't like Falvey's roster? That makes zero sense. Here are some direct quotes from T3: "We will be competitive in 2026," "We're in the business of winning baseball games," "I’d love to get off this ‘payroll’ thing for a second and let’s get halfway through the year, to the end of the year, and let’s judge the success of this year on wins and losses, on whether we’re playing meaningful baseball in September. " "My role, I think I'm going to play, if the question is, 'Are you going to be a passive owner or an active owner?' I'd say that I'm going to be an active owner," Does that sound like a hands off owner that is delegating everything to Zoll? Frankly I think it's odd that anyone would insist, without a shred of evidence, that T3 isn't involved in the decision making. Even a layperson can understand what "I'm going to be an active owner" means.
  9. Woof Bronzer
    Do you have a computer? Is it connected to the internet? If so, you can use a "search engine", such as Google to look things up and make sure you don't sound silly before posting.
  10. Woof Bronzer
    Obviously one couldn't KNOW that both Lopez and Ryan were going to get hurt, but given the demands of the modern game and past history with injuries, the risk should have been known. Tough Talkin' Tom is proving to be the least competent Pohlad yet. Under Jim the Twins operated on a continuous five-year-plan, always planning for a future that never came. Terry Ryan actually had a philosophy that reflected the market in which he was operating: focus on defense, solid bullpens and contact starters that let the defense do their thing. These things are affordable and the Twins weren't trying to compete with larger payroll teams for expensive skills like slugging. Joey didn't really have a plan, the Twins were a toy or a strat-o-matic game to keep him preoccupied from ruining other Pohlad businesses. He's the only Pohlad who has shown any interest in spending money to win. It was only when the elder Pohlads discovered that he had financially mismanaged the organization so badly they couldn't sell the team that he was removed. T3 operates on a one year plan, and that is to make as much money as possible to clean up the books, pay back their investor loans, and sell the team. There's no future view, very little baseball consideration at all in fact. Of course he wasn't going to trade Lopez or Ryan, because he thought they would boost attendance. Trading either of them for future value likely never crossed his mind; "future value" is a dirty word to people like T3. "Future value" doesn't buy you that 3rd yacht you've been eyeing. Pros and cons to each Pohlad, but Tom's shortsightedness is going to set back the baseball operations for years if Ryan is indeed hurt.
  11. Woof Bronzer
    And then they won the Series again in 91 using the pieces they gained in trading Viola a couple years later. This roster is in no danger of winning a World Series, much less 2 in 4 years. I'm going to go out on a limb and say this situation is juuuuuuuuust a bit different than your scenario.
  12. Woof Bronzer
    Ope meant to reply separately to this one. Yeah I saw the same thing about Abel, dude was arguably higher on him than Bradley. The gloating after 3 starts is the best though, I thought it was an agreed-upon fact that 3 starts is a small sample size. We're living in the Age of Grievances. If you aint grievancing about something, you aint living.
  13. Woof Bronzer
    Yeah I thought it was odd that you pulled a bunch of quotes around 8/24 and 8/25/25. Seemed oddly specific...so I put my crack research skills to the test and it turns out on 8/24 Taj gave up 7 runs on 9 hits in an 8-0 loss to the White Sox. This was one of the worst pitched games of the entire season. Why did you happen to single out this game thread? Coincidence? I guess I don't blame folks for being upset at his performance - a poop emoji is probably not negative enough. So, in an effort to improve the research skills you criticized, I took a look at another game thread from a month later. On September 24 Bradley went six, giving up a run and striking out 9. Here's every Bradley comment in that thread: "It was easily his most impressive outing since the Twins traded for him....flashed the front-of-the-rotation upside" "Very impressive and encouraging start....I think he will be an important part of the rotation in 2026." "Bradley was the only hope that can help us next season" "Bradley did well. This is the guy you signed up for when you traded for him, and he's probably got the inside track for a rotation spot." "excellent start...hopefully he can build on that." Not a single negative comment. But to be fair there was one comment that wasn't quite as effusive: "Taj Bradley still has some very good stuff. The issue has been the crooked innings." I'll let you guess who said that. I did notice through my (poor) research skills that you were very high on Mick Abel last fall too. For some reason you've been pretty quiet on him so far this year. How come? How are the "facts" looking on him?
  14. Woof Bronzer
    I assume he means for Griffin. If he's half of what he's cracked up to be, and manages to stay healthy (both big ifs), making $15m/year in his prime (26-28 years old) will be one of the greatest bargains in MLB history. Juan Soto, the last teenage position player to debut, will be making $51m/year through his age 26-28 seasons.
  15. Woof Bronzer
    I'm bored and off today, so for some reason I looked at the 4 articles you posted. #1 One comment about Bradley, fairly positive. #2. Not a single negative comment about Bradley, all comments are that he should stay a starter #3 Not a single comment about Bradley at all. #4 2 comments about Bradley, 1 suggesting that the BP is a backup plan if things don't go well as a starter, the other optimistic about him. You said people have been "trashing" Bradley on this site. Based on the evidence you provided that's unequivocally false. I'm very curious, why is it important to you to make up this anti-Bradley sentiment? Just to say you were right? Maybe it makes you feel better, who knows.
  16. Woof Bronzer
    You mentioned offseason articles. There was 1, and the comments were mixed (in fact most were pro-Bradley). You're moving the goalposts but that's fine, we all do. I think it's awfully bold to drape the Mission Accomplished banner after 3 starts from Bradley. I guess small sample sizes are totally fine if they tell a story you like. Being a topline MLB starter means pitching just as well in September as in April. If you look at his monthly splits in his career, his 4 best xFIP months were May or earlier and his 4 worst were July or later. He has also had several great 3 game stretches in his career. Often followed up by terrible stretches. He still has a lot to prove. I do think the change of scenery helped him and if he has changed his mental approach to the game and dedication to his craft than I am optimistic about his future. Let's revisit this in September.
  17. Woof Bronzer
    It appears there was a grand total of 1 article about Bradley in the offseason. Definitely some comments calling for the BP, but majority seemed to be in the "give him a shot to start" variety.
  18. Woof Bronzer
    Sure, but I'm going to want more than a couple decent starts from Bradley before I declare him an ace. His problem has been consistency/meatballs and it's too early to say he's eliminated those issues.
  19. Woof Bronzer
    A little early to hang the "We won this trade" banner, but early 2026 returns are very positive. I like watching Bradley pitch.
  20. Woof Bronzer
    Sure they can. Prospects are always just that. There are thousands of examples of highly rated draftees busting out. And thousands of examples of guys who dominate the minors but can't put it together in MLB (there's even a name for these guys: AAAA players.) Does Brooks Lee look like a top 100 player to you? Quick, name a good MLB SS who was slow. had limited range, and couldn't hit. It isn't his fault that he was asked to start? At the position he was drafted to play? What???? There are millions of players who would give up everything they have for a starting MLB SS position. Poor Brooks Lee, how unfair for him to be expected to do the thing he's dreamed about since he was a kid!
  21. Woof Bronzer
    I mean, SS is a pretty important position on a baseball team...are you saying Lee's performance shouldn't be mentioned anymore? Or should we pretend that he's better than he is? "It's not fair to criticize poor performance" is something you hear from loser organizations, so it fits with the Twins, but I guess I don't understand the benefit of ignoring bad performance from critical positions. This entire organization needs more accountability, not less.
  22. Woof Bronzer
    Is there evidence that the Twins are telling guys if they strike out they'll get demoted? I agree, that would be ill advised.
  23. Woof Bronzer
    I think Wallner is fine, a one tool player but it's a valuable tool, especially given his contract. Teams like the Twins are never going to compete for the big free agent sluggers, so they need to identify and leverage cost-effective alternatives. I also think his absolute ceiling is, what, 3 WAR? And his floor is AAA? I mean, it just seems weird to get worked up one way or the other about guys like Matt Wallner. It really must be the Forest Lake thing.
  24. Woof Bronzer
    It's professional sports. You ARE under a microscope, always. Literally every single thing every player does on the field is recorded, viewed, analyzed. Baseball statistics are robust and easily available. Teams know every single detail about a player's approach, off the field training, diet/nutrition, etc. If an MLB player isn't good enough there are 10,000 players ready to take their place. If you don't feel like you're under a microscope you're probably not going to last very long in the league. Brooks Lee should feel like he is playing for his career as an MLB starter right now. Royce Lewis should feel the same. Baseball is not an office job. Accountability is good.
  25. Woof Bronzer
    You know I respect you greatly...but I feel like you have much higher standards than crediting the team for not giving up on the season by April 6.
×
×
  • Create New...