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
    So pick the right ones. That IS an option. Wanting a worse, but more expensive player, just to avoid padding the owner's pocketbook takes being pro-labor to an unhealthy level, IMO. Spend the money, yes, I'm not pro ownership, but there is a compelling argument that relief pitching may not be the smart place to do it.
  2. Mr. Brooks
    It's basically 1 year with a team option for a 2nd, as he'd still be under team control in 2020 via arbitration.
  3. Mr. Brooks
    Well there are middle and lower priced free agents, who may perform just as well, or better than those few top priced ones. Especially at relief pitching, it appears.
  4. Mr. Brooks
    I think the Twins would trade one of Kepler or Rosario once AK is ready. Rosario isn't a great fielder, but he's far too competent to waste at DH- where his bat wouldn't be great to start with.
  5. Mr. Brooks
    A package headlined by Gonsalves isn't getting a front of the rotation starter, no matter how much quantity is added. I'm doubtful that you could get a deal done even with Gonsalved as the second piece. Do you have any historical examples of legit front of the rotation starters being traded for a package that didn't include a single top 100 prospect?
  6. Mr. Brooks
    Kiriloff is a pretty solid defensive corner outfielder. I'd be surprised if they move him to first base.
  7. Mr. Brooks
    Nobody is trading a front of the rotation starter for Gonsalves. You might be able to get two months of someone like Eduardo Escobar or Eduardo Nunez.
  8. Mr. Brooks
    Which Roku do you have? Is it a USB stick, or a box?
  9. Mr. Brooks
    This is a whole 'nother can of worms. But, if he did what was expected, and it didn't tell us much, why do the Twins bother sending these advanced college bats to rookie ball in the first place? Seems like a waste of time.
  10. Mr. Brooks
    I agree, and don't think it's even close. I guess I'm missing the boat on Rooker, but I wouldn't rank him higher than Walker and Palka were when they were in our system.
  11. Mr. Brooks
    He's right. Everyone who isn't elite or terrible is going to have wild swings in monthly OPS. It's just not a large enough sample size to be stable. I'd look to k and bb rates, and line drive percentage if you want to look at monthly trends. Edit to add: That doesn't mean that it can't tell a story, just that it needs to be verified with those other things that stabilize more quickly.
  12. Mr. Brooks
    I love the aggressiveness of Lewis at #1. I'm sure you'll get a lot of pushback on that, and we'll hear a lot about how often prospects bust. But, I really think, barring catastrophic injuries, this kid is practically can't miss. And I think he's got a good chance to be a superstar.
  13. Mr. Brooks
    Sorry, poor phrasing.This is what I meant. The voters can, and IMO should consider character and integrity. The post I was responding to seemed to suggest that cheating (Bonds/Clemens) and despicable views (Schilling) weren't relevant.
  14. Mr. Brooks
    Unlike the other major sports, the baseball hof has a morals clause.
  15. Mr. Brooks
    I'm sure Brian will be happy to hear that. Twins pitchers, probably not so much.
  16. Mr. Brooks
    Ok, we just need to figure out which player doesn't have a cell phone or email in 2019, and we'll know for ourselves who was removed.
  17. Mr. Brooks
    Nope, Thorpe was protected a year ago. He's been on the 40 man roster since 11/20/2017.
  18. Mr. Brooks
    You'd still have 6 teams bidding, which is plenty. It only takes 2 teams to drive up a price.
  19. Mr. Brooks
    Or, he was always going to sign for a market with a large Japanese culture, as I predicted a few posts up. I don't think there is a remotely reasonable offer that the Twins could have made that would have even gotten a response. The new posting rules are great for the Asian players, but terrible for every team that's not in LA, NY, Seattle, or San Francisco.
  20. Mr. Brooks
    Sorry, that's not what I meant to debate. Your Sano ranking is fine with me. I was debating your conclusion that 40 HR hitters aren't in demand anymore, which you pointed to Cruz's relatively conservative contract to come to. That contract is weighted by the risk that, at his age, any day now could be the day he stops hitting. If you could guarantee a team 40 HR and an .860 OPS, he'd have gotten a much bigger contract. IF Sano becomes the hitter he's capable of, IF (and I have as many doubts as you), he'll have plenty of value. He was worth 2.3 bWAR in half a season his rookie year.
  21. Mr. Brooks
    There is no such thing as a 38 year old who is almost guaranteed to hit 20 HR's, let alone 40. That is why Cruz was signed for what he was. If Cruz was 25 instead of 38, his contract would be much bigger.
  22. Mr. Brooks
    If 29 other teams didn't want Nelson Cruz, we'd have gotten him for the league minimum. 29 other teams didn't want him for the same price we did. But, that's true of any negotiable item. By your logic, 29 teams won't want Harper, 29 teams won't want Machado, and nobody on the planet wanted any of our currently owned homes.
  23. Mr. Brooks
    Not technically. Hit, power, run, throw, field are the five tools. But neither is athlete, which is in the article.
  24. Mr. Brooks
    I agree with most of that in principle. But, Sano came up and posted a .916 OPS, finishing 3rd in ROY voting. Whatever his issues are, he was clearly ready to hit MLB pitching when he came up.
  25. Mr. Brooks
    Mlb.com has him 4th, one spot behind Graterol, who they have ranked #70. I'll wager that he makes at least one top 100 list this spring, and is mentioned as just missing on at least one more.
×
×
  • Create New...