Jump to content
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
    They can cut Johnson and/or Wright if there becomes a roster crunch.
  2. Mr. Brooks
    Well the coaching staff thinks so little of Treadwell, that he couldn't even see the field in a meaningless for both teams week 17 game. I don't think he should be in any plans for next year. If we get anything from him, consider it a bonus.
  3. Mr. Brooks
    I'd add a WR to that list. I don't think Patterson will be back, it only takes 1 team to think they can improve him as a wr and make him a big offer. With Diggs versatility, we could go a couple directions. We could get a slot guy, or get a big outside WR and play Diggs from the slot.
  4. Mr. Brooks
    With home field advantage no longer determined by the ASG, I think Dozier has more value in the regular season than you think. He could be the difference between home field and not. Also, I wouldn't sleep on the Giants. They don't want to get into a 1 game wild card situation.
  5. Mr. Brooks
    Am I reading this right? You are saying the Twins will finish 2nd in the division at worst?
  6. Mr. Brooks
    Sure, but unlike the real world, the Twins have no insurance against the house burning to the ground. Waiting until the deadline carries risk as well.
  7. Mr. Brooks
    Disagree. You are saying that sports owners sometimes make emotional rather than rational decisions. I'm saying in this case the Dodgers ownership has nothing to do with it. Andrew Friedman is in charge of the trade negotiations, and he is going to act rationally, not emotionally.
  8. Mr. Brooks
    Well with only one interested buyer you aren't getting that. So sure, you are within your rights, but you aren't realistically trying to sell the house.
  9. Mr. Brooks
    Dodgers ownership isn't the GM though. There may be some GM's who could be meddled by ownership- ours for example. But I doubt Andrew Friedman is one of them. I'm guessing he has enough clout that ownership isn't going to meddle in his trade negotiations.
  10. Mr. Brooks
    That depends on how good the offer is. I consider JDL plus Alvarez a pretty big overpay. If I put my house on the market and someone offers 20k over asking, I'm taking it before they have a chance to sober up. Especially if they are the only one interested.
  11. Mr. Brooks
    Because only one team has interest.
  12. Mr. Brooks
    I wouldn't play Bradford. If he shreds his knee like Teddy did, then we are screwed going into 2017. And Treadwell, the few times we've seen him this year, the defenders have run his routes better than him. Maybe he's improved over the last few weeks.
  13. Mr. Brooks
    If it's a promise that you'll never break then there is no reason not to put it in the contract. Do you have an explanation for why they would make it a handshake understanding, rather than just put in a no trade clause?
  14. Mr. Brooks
    What if you have an employee that you know is stealing from the company, but the police say there is not enough evidence to charge them?
  15. Mr. Brooks
    If the Twins think they can win in 2017 or 2018 they don't make Dozier available in the first place.
  16. Mr. Brooks
    I'm not sure where you are going with the comparison to the war on drugs. Drug use doesn't directly impact others the way that sexual assault does. Are you saying that if someone doesn't think drugs should be treated as a criminal matter then they are hypocrites if they think sexual assault should be? The bigger and more apt difference in this situation though is that nobody here is calling for these guys to go to prison. This is a university policy issue. Just like schools and workplaces can have a policy against drugs, which most of us who oppose the war on drugs understand is completely different than law enforcement, and are OK with.
  17. Mr. Brooks
    All good points. One thing I'd like to point out regarding the time-line is that you don't have to necessarily wait for him to reach mlb to have an impact. If we are competitive in 2019 and he's still 2 years away you can trade him for an impact player.
  18. Mr. Brooks
    The customer offering 90 cents on the dollar might not wait around until February. He might go to a different store. I'm not saying it HAS to be a rush, although I do believe the best offer is going to come from the Dodgers. I also think they will get sick of the games at some point and walk away from the table forever. I was more responding to those saying take 100 cents on the dollar or nothing at all.
  19. Mr. Brooks
    Well we completely disagree to the extent that these cases are going to erode any principles of justice. And that's OK.
  20. Mr. Brooks
    I guess to me when you are only risking someone wrongly having to change schools (not jail time or having to register as a sex offender), then I'm OK weighing that risk against protecting women's right not to be assaulted. You may end up being right that it doesn't help. Time will tell. I'm still OK trying it though. You always weigh the consequences on both sides of a civil liberty issue. You don't have the freedom of speech to yell fire in a crowded theater. In a vacuum that is a clear violation of 1st amendment rights, but when weighed against the consequences, it's more important to protect people from being trampled. You can lose your 2nd amendment rights if you have a history of violence. Cops can search your house without a warrant if they have reasonable suspicion that danger is imminent, like you have a kidnapped person inside, or a bomb. Every single constitutional right, or civil liberty that we have, I can give examples of instances that public safety is given priority over your individual right.
  21. Mr. Brooks
    If you owned a store and had perishable items overstocked, you'd be a fool to hold out for full retail price when only one customer was interested. Now, maybe if you are being lowballed you hold out for more customers. But if someone offers 90 cents on the dollar you don't say I'd rather just keep it and let it spoil because it's "worth" more than that.
  22. Mr. Brooks
    Nothing at all. Someone else brought him into the discussion, not me. I wasn't exactly sure why either, but I think it went like this: Them: We need help now, not in 4 years, and HS arms are too risky. I wouldn't consider Greene at 1-1. Me: I hope they don't take Greene off their board just because HS arms are risky. He wouldn't be in the discussion if he didn't have upside to go with that risk. Them: That is how you end up with a bust like Hochever at 1-1. Me: Just because Hochever busted at 1-1 in hindsight, doesn't mean he shouldn't have been a consideration for that pick. I'm not an eloquent writer so I may have been missing with my points. I hope that synopsis helps with what the convo looked like in my head.
  23. Mr. Brooks
    My point is that your solution is a societal one. It's not something the Universities can have much control over. Maybe when more is done on society and law enforcement's part, then the universities can walk some of these policies back a bit.
  24. Mr. Brooks
    The Cars not getting in is a joke. Happy for ELO, long overdue.
  25. Mr. Brooks
    The schools decided to step in and handle what they could in their end. They couldn't just sit around and wait any longer for the criminal justice system to come around. I agree that more needs to be done on the criminal side. I just disagree that it has to be either/or.
×
×
  • Create New...