Jump to content
Our top free agent ranking is up to 75 names; click here to check it out! ×
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

Mr. Brooks

Verified Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    8,256

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    13

 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 Mr. Brooks

  1. Mr. Brooks
    Why not? Kepler doesn't struggle against lefties. In fact he's hit lefties better than righties two years in a row now.
  2. Mr. Brooks
    I completely agree, just don't think 3 PA sample sizes do anything to augment that opinion.
  3. Mr. Brooks
    The league would be the worst negotiators in the history of economics if they did anything less than laugh hysterically at the proposition that teams be forced to sign an injured player to a contract (that's what tender means, in this context, "to tender a contract"), and theoretically be forced to do it 4 consecutive seasons to boot (if a Super 2 player were to suffer a career ending injury with 4 arbitration years remaining). Of course they don't have to tender him a contract.
  4. Mr. Brooks
    Those sample sizes are so tiny, that IMO, they mean nothing.
  5. Mr. Brooks
    But you claimed his bat wouldn't play as a corner outfielder. I agree it's less valuable there, likely enough for Sano to surpass him, but that wasn't what I was questioning. His bat still plays at corner outfielder. There are people on this site who think Rosario is among the team MVP candidates.
  6. Mr. Brooks
    Sano has never played more than 116 games in a season. Why does Sano magically get assumed for "consistently playing 140+ games", but Buxton has to actually do it back to back first? As far as durability goes, they're basically a wash at this point.
  7. Mr. Brooks
    Every player is playing with discomfort after about the third week of the season. That won't be nearly enough of a case for any compensation. There'd need to be evidence that a medical procedure, or official diagnosis was omitted from his medical files. It'd be absurd to expect teams to update a player's medical files everytime they are sore or uncomfortable.
  8. Mr. Brooks
    Everybody's percentage of all income was way higher in 1931, than today, because there were far less people. It has no meaning whatsoever if it's not adjusted per capita. But this is getting way off topic.
  9. Mr. Brooks
    You're saying the average American had more purchasing power during the great depression than they do now? Because that doesn't seem very depressing, if true.
  10. Mr. Brooks
    It seems like half the game is completely missing whenever you post stats that compare Buxton and Sano.
  11. Mr. Brooks
    Buxton has a better OPS this year than Eddie Rosario (corner outfielder) has had in any year except 2017, and even that was only 9 points higher.
  12. Mr. Brooks
    Of course we don't know if Cruz will still be good in 2021 though. What Cruz is doing is amazing, but father time is undefeated. There is simply no upside to trying to extend or tack on years at his age, IMO. It's not like some team is going to come in and blow away a 41 year old with some crazy long term contract offer. If he likes it here, and the money is fair, then nothing stands in the way of going year to year with him.
  13. Mr. Brooks
    Sure, but (and this assumes he finds a way to stay healthy) Buxton on the field improves every pitcher on the team. I'd rather trade prospects for pitching than Buxton.
  14. Mr. Brooks
    That's not a meaningful way to compare, because the population is nearly 3x what it was in 1931. It needs to be adjusted to reflect per capita, which is what my data does.
  15. Mr. Brooks
    He'd still be on normal rest to start game 1, if he starts Sunday.
  16. Mr. Brooks
    Only if they manage to hit 21 HR's over the last 6 games.
  17. Mr. Brooks
    You are claiming context that wasn't there. You specifically and explicitly claimed there were numerous studies that show that increasing innings too quickly causes injuries. It wasn't until after I asked you to link one of these studies that you backtracked to say that what you really meant was that since teams limit innings increases, it must mean that they have studies to support it. There is no context that I missed, and I didn't come in midstream.
  18. Mr. Brooks
    I don't necessarily disagree, but Gibson has to share some of that blame as well. I doubt he told the team he was still not ready and they forced him to start anyway. He's a grown man and should be honest with the team, rather than thinking he has to be a tough guy and tell the team he can play when he can't.
  19. Mr. Brooks
    What numbers are you using to say that Ruth's salary, compared to average US salary, would be $60M today? By my math, that's way off. Average US income in 1930 was $1368, which means Ruth made 58.48 times the average US salary. The average salary today is roughly $56,516, depending on which source you use. Multiplying $55,516 by 58.48 gets us $3.3M, or a little more than 5% of your figure.
  20. Mr. Brooks
    It's also standard practice for non analytical teams, so I'm not sure that argument has any meaning. For all we know it's just one of those traditions that gets passed on in FO circles, for no actual analytical reason. The opinions you express are fair and valid. I just get uncomfortable when they are stated with factual authority (numerous studies), because that is how misinformation spreads. There are posters who will read what you originally stated, and it will stick in their mind as fact.
  21. Mr. Brooks
    In your post that I originally responded to, you made the following claim: "There have been numerous studies that show that when guys make drastic jumps in the number of innings pitched, they strain their arms and get injured." Are you saying that what you meant is that you don't actually know if there are any such studies, but you just assume there are because of how teams operate?
  22. Mr. Brooks
    Seems legit.
  23. Mr. Brooks
    I wasn't able to find the data for winning the division. But, since the beginning of the wild card era (1996), only 1 team ('99 Reds) have won 96+ games and not made the postseason.
  24. Mr. Brooks
    Only one of the links you provided deal with innings increases year over year, and that study finds no evidence that increasing innings too quickly causes injury. The relevant findings: "RESULTS: A total of 161 starting MLB pitchers met the inclusion criteria. With the exception of total innings pitched from 2010-2011 being significantly associated with DL placement in 2012 (no DL, 310.5 ± 97.5 innings; DL, 344.7 ± 85.9 innings; P = .040), no other finding for starts, pitch counts, innings, or pitches per start in the cumulative years from 2010-2014 had a significant association with pitcher placement on the DL for any musculoskeletal reason or for an upper extremity reason between 2011 and 2015. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, we demonstrate that there is no association between preceding years of cumulative pitches, starts, innings pitched, or average pitches per start and being placed on the DL for any musculoskeletal reason." Again, as far as I'm aware of, and I've looked, there are no studies that show that arbitrary limits on inning increases year over year have any bearing on preventing injury. If Graterol is healthy, he should be allowed to throw as many innings as he is able to until his body tells him it's enough. Not some arbitrary number they decide on beforehand.
  25. Mr. Brooks
    It doesn't make sense that someone would suggest that a .648 OPS and a negative WAR is performing poorly? You're essentially saying that no player in MLB has performed poorly then.
×
×
  • Create New...