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
    According to MLB Trade rumors, it's pretty much a foregone conclusion that Ervin won't be moved. They are holding out for an offer that "blows them away". With such an inflated sense of the worth of their own players, yeah it's going to be a pretty dull deadline.
  2. Mr. Brooks
    There is always going to be an excuse. You yourself said he should be up 2 weeks ago, Seth. (It's time!) The trade deadline is just another fabricated excuse. Are the Twins really shopping Tyler Duffey? If not, then Berrios should have taken his spot and Duffey can come back up when someone is moved. After 8/1, if the Twins don't find a taker for Nolasco or Milone, the next fabricated excuse will be the 8/31 trade deadline. After that deadline it will be that Rochester is in the playoffs and it would be good for their development to let Berrios help them get a taste of a championship. After that it will be that his innings are getting high, and he just pitched a bunch of high stress innings in the playoffs and there is no point in risking an injury by piling on with meaningless September innings. Next thing you know, it's spring training and Berrios doesn't "win" the tiny sample size practice games competition for the rotation. Or, it'll be, hey the Twins probably should have had him up last year, but since they didn't, it only makes good business sense to keep him down another 3 weeks and gain another year of control! Enough with the excuses. There will ALWAYS be one that can be defended in a vacuum. The well run organizations find room when top prospects are ready. They don't put some desperate hope for a slightly better C prospect ahead of the development of a top prospect.
  3. Mr. Brooks
    Well there is 0 % chance they get back as much as they gave up right now, so just the fact that they are thinking about moving him means they must be considering selling low.
  4. Mr. Brooks
    Dude, I didn't quote you, I quoted someone else, why are you responding for them?
  5. Mr. Brooks
    Every so often we find pitchers that consistently under or over perform their FIP and/or xFIP though. If not, Rickey Nolasco would be a pretty hot deadline commodity. I'm not saying that is the case with either of these 2 guys, I don't think either has a large enough sample size to know that yet, but I don't think it's fair to say that ERA is never the most predictive of the 3.
  6. Mr. Brooks
    That's fair but that's not what the guy I quoted said. He said it was irrelevant because of the small sample of 51 innings, not because it was his first mlb exposure.
  7. Mr. Brooks
    So why is Miller's 2016 relevant then? 69 IP is relevant, 51 is not?
  8. Mr. Brooks
    So I'm paraphrasing here, but basically the Twins feel: Even though he's dominating at AAA, they want to see 6 or 7 straight starts where not even a single hitter makes "solid contact". Wow, unreal.
  9. Mr. Brooks
    Very good haul for a guy that does no good for the Yankees right now. I realize that Perkins was never in Chapman's league, so he wouldn't have gotten the same haul, but this is exactly what the Twins should have done with Perkins when he was good.
  10. Mr. Brooks
    I'd rather deal early because there is always the chance a guy gets hurt a week before the deadline and then you can't move him.
  11. Mr. Brooks
    The only thing I can think of is that they figure this deep into the season they might as well keep him down until about 5/1 next year and get yet another season of team control out of him. I realize some claim the Twins don't play that game, but with 3 slots in the rotation to choose from (Nolasco, Milone, Duffey), I don't see any other reason he's not up yet.
  12. Mr. Brooks
    Yes, and again, he is saying that if we had tanked for the #1 overall pick, we could have had a chance to pick them. That is the entire premise of the thread.
  13. Mr. Brooks
    Well surely the REAL good hitters would never make the last out of a game, so I can see how that would be concerning. Who would ever say Sano is a finished product? He's 23 years old, he's going to get even better. I just meant, statistically speaking, he was probably going to take a small step back this year before he takes a few steps forward. I think you under appreciate just how good Sano was last year. I don't know who we should compare him to, I'm not even saying he can't hit like those guys some day. But if that is your minimum expectation from day 1, well that is setting the bar too high. As for Cruz to Sano, let the numbers speak for themselves. Sano through first 627 PA (23 years old): 82 runs, 28 2b, 33 HR, 90 rbi, 91 bb, 216 k, .260/.368/.504 (.872) Cruz through first 611 PA (28 years old) : 70 runs, 28 2b, 22 HR, 82 rbi, 47 bb, 147k, .251/.311/.393 (.704) Sano is 5 years younger and already has 168 points of OPS in his corner.
  14. Mr. Brooks
    I'd double down on that and keep him there all of next year too, no matter what. This team isn't contending next year either, so what's the harm?
  15. Mr. Brooks
    Improvement offensively from Sano was going to be pretty tough this year, considering his scorching rookie year. He's 23 and has a career .872 OPS. I mean what do you want from the guy? Mike Trout? AROD? Hank Aaron? Ripping Sano's defense is one thing, there is nothing wrong with his bat.
  16. Mr. Brooks
    Agree that if they decide to bring Park back up, and Vargas is still hitting, Mauer needs to move to a bench role. The question is, does this team have the guts to bench Joe.
  17. Mr. Brooks
    I think average was probably thrown around as his ceiling. Guys who are not natural fielders sometimes take a few years to hit their defensive peak. I'm not sure he can ever get to average defensively, but maybe in a few years he could be adequate.
  18. Mr. Brooks
    Read the rest of his post (or the thread title). He's saying you can give yourself the chance to pick those guys by tanking for the #1 overall pick.
  19. Mr. Brooks
    If you expected Sano to be a good defender you were reading the wrong scouting reports. Sano is here for his bat. I don't see how anyone can be disappointed in his development in that regard.
  20. Mr. Brooks
    Why would you pinch hit for Buxton in the midst of a 100 loss season? Still hoping they can catch that second wild card?
  21. Mr. Brooks
    Yes, it's too early for an absolute conclusion. But, at Park's age, you aren't signing him as a developmental project. His signing needs to be looked at from a results based perspective from the get go. He's already on the back side of his prime years.
  22. Mr. Brooks
    We'll have to agree to disagree I guess. I see rebuilding as a process, you insist it is only a destination. I don't think they intended to get where they are, I think they were sincerely surprised every single one of these years that they were bad. Aside from trading Span ( I don't count Revere because I think that was a "baseball trade", I think they thought Worley made them better right away) I don't think they made a single move that pointed to rebuild.
  23. Mr. Brooks
    Except the Twins went out of their way to state that Park was never injured. Not saying they are above lying, but one of the two is.
  24. Mr. Brooks
    Simply building the farm system through your normal draft picks does not constitute a rebuild. With a true rebuild, Perkins would have been traded at his peak. Willingham would have been traded after his first season. We would have had more make good 1 year deals hoping to flip, instead of multiple year deals like Nolasco, Hughes and Santana. Suzuki would have been traded at some point. Fien would have been traded after he showed that 1 or 2 ok years. And, Terry never shied away from saying he intended to compete. Other GMs admit when they are rebuilding. San Diego just did, so don't tell me it was a lie he had to tell.
  25. Mr. Brooks
    I could be wrong but I don't think a player on the DL can be placed on trade waivers.
×
×
  • Create New...