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

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 Mr. Brooks

  1. Mr. Brooks
    While I don't necessarily disagree with your overall position, I cringe when people use the "they are young for their league" argument to defend non promotions. Actual prospects are nearly always going to be young for their league, no matter how slowly they are promoted. The milb non prospect (which is the vast majority of players) lifers skew that average age up, as do mid to late round college filler picks.
  2. Mr. Brooks
    Baldelli's career wasn't derailed by overuse injuries. It was derailed by a chronic disease. Do you really think that Baldelli is afraid he will give his players Mitochondrial Disease by overusing them?
  3. Mr. Brooks
    The northern teams would love to play a lot of road games early in the year, when school is still in session. It's the southern teams that would never go for giving up a bunch of their summer home games when bed time isn't an issue.
  4. Mr. Brooks
    According to Lavelle, it's intentional. He said on the radio this morning that the coaching staff is preaching the hitters to attack strikes early in the count.
  5. Mr. Brooks
    I haven't suggested cutting Cron. My suggestion would be to keep both, for now.
  6. Mr. Brooks
    I understand the FO's and other posters reasons. I just don't agree with them. Difference of opinion. Great thing about sports is we get to find out if they were right or wrong.
  7. Mr. Brooks
    It's only 8 innings, so those numbers don't mean a ton. But, I wish they would have kept him. I was always a supporter of his potential and rostering, even against an avalanche of disagreement.
  8. Mr. Brooks
    They could have, they chose not to. Big difference.
  9. Mr. Brooks
    I didn't say every time, I said this time. It's not very often that this high leverage of a spot will come up this early in a game. It might not happen again all season. I also never implied that Vasquez should never see a high leverage situation. How about not his very first appearance though. These are not robots, they are humans, this was a tough first assignment of the year for a young guy with all of 5 career innings.
  10. Mr. Brooks
    I think with a guy like Gonzalez, who can back up both infield and corner outfield, and two starting corner outfielders both capable of backing up centerfield, that the Twins could have carried Austin this year.
  11. Mr. Brooks
    Arcia was given 1000 PA's to see if he could turn the corner. He didn't. Maybe Austin wouldn't have either, we'll see.
  12. Mr. Brooks
    If I'm building a roster, no I'm not trying to carry an extra 1B/DH. But once that's the case, yes I am finding a way not to throw away an asset for essentially nothing. Maybe Austin will never make any improvements and I'll be wrong. That's fine, I don't shy away from being wrong. Sometimes when you hear a guy speak about his craft though, you just get a gut feeling that he has what it takes to make those improvements. That's where I'm at with Austin. What's done is done now though, we'll just have to kick back and see who Austin becomes.
  13. Mr. Brooks
    Well I would absolutely use Rogers. Third inning, fifth inning, seventeen inning, I don't care. The highest leverage outs can come anytime. I'm not a fan of hard and fast rules regarding which innings each reliever can pitch. I hope that's the next tradition to die. But, if Vasquez really was called up to pitch high leverage spots, then yeah that's on the FO. I'm really disappointed if the FO brought up a rookie with mediocre stuff to pitch high leverage spots though.
  14. Mr. Brooks
    Again, I don't want catchers and third basemen playing first base. Fundamental disagreement. That's fine, but no point banging our heads against a wall.
  15. Mr. Brooks
    You warm him up instead of Vasquez. And yes, that may mean you have to warm him up again later. Unless a guy is coming off an injury, I don't think you can make it a policy that they never warm up more than once.
  16. Mr. Brooks
    And my concern is that Cron gets injured (or ineffective) before one of those guys is ready. Now who plays 1B? Someone whose bat doesn't really play there. Which is interesting considering how you felt about Mauer's bat playing there.
  17. Mr. Brooks
    We most likely will be fine without him. I just don't like dumping assets until/unless you absolutely have to. The FO and many posters obviously disagree with me, either by thinking he's not an asset, or that they had no other choice. I don't agree on either count. I think he is an asset, one that could have either given value or netted a real return later. And I think they could have found a way to keep him. Those are just my opinions though. Doesn't mean they are right, and ultimately, of course, the FO's opinion trumps mine.
  18. Mr. Brooks
    You keep listing outfielders and catchers as reasons they don't need Austin. That's literally planning for his replacement with an outfielder.
  19. Mr. Brooks
    Sure, I'm not saying it's possible to play 162 games with every player maximized perfectly. For me though, my plan would be that Kiriloff is an outfielder, and if circumstances dictate that I MUST play him at 1B to get him in the lineup, then I will. I won't plan for Kiriloff (one example, could be Raley,etc) to be a 1B though. When Mike says dump Austin because Kiriloff can play 1B, that to me is planning for Kiriloff to play 1B. It's the same argument I have for Astudillo and Garver. I'd rather have them at 1B or DH than on the bench, but I'd really rather have them at 3B or C, where their bat actually gives you an edge over the league.
  20. Mr. Brooks
    That's my entire argument against dumping Austin right now.
  21. Mr. Brooks
    Uh, no, I'm never trading Kiriloff. I meant I'd trade Rosario or Kepler to open a spot for him.
  22. Mr. Brooks
    And trading is the path I'd take, every single time. Even if Kiriloff's bat plays at 1B, it plays even better in RF. I just don't think a team on a budget can afford to throw away that difference in value between Kiriloff at RF, and Kiriloff at 1B or DH.
  23. Mr. Brooks
    Some of these guys we knew were unlikely to be good coming into the season though. It's not really panicking to still feel that way.
  24. Mr. Brooks
    See my reply to Mike, it's more or less redundant to how I would have responded to this.
  25. Mr. Brooks
    Wade and Cave are 4th outfielders, not starters. The odds say only one of Rooker, Larnach and Kiriloff will develop into a starting caliber player. We (as well as Dman and I) have a fundamental disagreement regarding putting players capable of playing other positions at 1B or DH. I'd never do it. Teams on a budget have to maximize their players talents. Because of that fundamental disagreement, we'll never agree on this topic. And that's fine.
×
×
  • Create New...