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
    Yeah, they better be right on Griffen. I mean, they are around him, and I've never met him, so for now I'll give them the benefit of the doubt. And, I'm really rooting for him. But, he looked like a shell of his former self when he returned last year. Like a liability, actually.
  2. Mr. Brooks
    That secondary scares the hell out of me. We have no idea what we'll have in Hughes coming off a major injury. And I need to see Alexander repeat his progress from last year before I trust him as anything more than a 4th or 5th corner. And let's not forget that Rhodes was average by some metrics, well below average by others, last year. I know he was banged up, but still. Holton Hill really burned us with his stupidity, though that's why he fell to UFA in the first place.
  3. Mr. Brooks
    This will be a good lineup. Maybe even great. But they won't be the best lineup in the history of baseball, which is where they are currently on pace to be. Where are they going to make up that inevitable regression?
  4. Mr. Brooks
    The pitcher can shake him off. Pitch selection is on the pitcher.
  5. Mr. Brooks
    It's already been established concretely that driving is not a right. That is what allows for liability insurance to be a requirement to drive. I'm sure some of the old timers were upset when seat belt laws were introduced, but they got over it. Eventually cars will no longer be produced without this technology, just as cars are now no longer produced without air bags. It's still legal to drive a car without air bags, technically, but only if you want to drive a 20+ year old vehicle. The government has the authority to protect us from ourselves, especially when they aren't taking any rights away to do so, which again, driving is not a right. If you want to blame someone, blame the idiots that don't appreciate the responsibility that comes with operating a deadly weapon. It's their fault this will advance as quickly as it will, not the government or the car industry.
  6. Mr. Brooks
    I don't think it's that far away, the 100 years was just a random number, far enough away for people to look back in astonishment that so many people used to die from something that to them will be incredibly rare, the same way we look back at polio or smallpox now. I'd guess within 10 years, semiautonomous (human will still be required to be ready to take over) vehicles will have a significant share of the market. And within 25 years, the majority of vehicles on the road will be fully autonomous, no human supervision needed.
  7. Mr. Brooks
    Cumulatively sure, but outside of curing cancer, I'm not sure any one single medical advancement can save 40,000 lives every year.
  8. Mr. Brooks
    I predict that in 100 years, this technology will be looked back upon as one of the, if not THE most lifesaving advancement in the history of humankind. 40,000 people every year die in traffic accidents, and nearly every single one of them is due to driver error. No offense intended Hosken, but you remind me of Newsweek famously predicting that the internet would be a short lived fad.
  9. Mr. Brooks
    You'll have to find where I ever said or even implied that I wanted Michael Brantley. Until then, please stop putting words in my mouth, and arguing things I did not say.
  10. Mr. Brooks
    Weird, I always thought baseball was a team game. You really believe that simply having been on a championship TEAM automatically makes you a clutch player, and never being on a championship TEAM makes you unclutch? Can you give me some examples of Gonzalez' leadership skills that led to the Astros WS title, aside from simply being on their roster?
  11. Mr. Brooks
    So the time to move him up in the order would be if he was hitting poorly?
  12. Mr. Brooks
    What do you consider clutch situations? Because in both late and close situations, and 2 out with RISP, Marwin Gonzalez has been absolutely brutal over his career, while Brantley has excelled.
  13. Mr. Brooks
    It's a benefit because, like it or not, the FO has a budget they have to answer to. That said, I don't have much interest in Gio specifically.
  14. Mr. Brooks
    What do you mean by him being a front runner?
  15. Mr. Brooks
    Are a lot of people calling it a good trade, or like me, are many simply saying it's too early to call it a bad trade? There is a big difference. And no, I personally wouldn't make that trade in reverse. I'd never trade a legit prospect for a reliever, ever. As a whole, I understand the increased value of bullpens, but on an individual level, they are still too inconsistent and unpredictable. With no data, just my impression, you seem to see far more good relief pitchers suddenly fall off a cliff than you do any other position.
  16. Mr. Brooks
    It certainly isn't the first time this FO has been extremely optimistic, at least publicly, in players injury timelines.
  17. Mr. Brooks
    What would the basis of the lawsuit be? Renting a car isn't a right, neither is smoking. And it's already concretely established that a minimum age, unlike a maximum age, is not discriminatory. Even a maximum age isn't necessarily discriminatory, such as mandatory retirement ages for state judges. The minimum age to rent a car is based on factual risk assessment, which is different than denying service to a race or religion, etc.
  18. Mr. Brooks
    How many border patrol officers are you going to need to watch every single mile of the wall? How far can each one see in each direction? Multiply all those thousands of agents times three shifts per day, times annual salary and benefits, then add the cost of the wall. It's astronomical and impractical. You can cover far more ground with far less manpower by using UAV and mobile ground units.
  19. Mr. Brooks
    I've seen people turn down a beer for many reasons in my life. Not once has the weather ever been one of those reasons.
  20. Mr. Brooks
    It's phased in over 5 years. Right now it's either 11.25 or 10.25, depending on how many employees these vendors have. So, nowhere near 15/hr.
  21. Mr. Brooks
    I guess Kiriloff's injury must be much worse than the Twins let on? At the start of the season Seth seemed to imply that he'd just miss a few days for precautionary reasons.
  22. Mr. Brooks
    Because humans long ago evolved to the point that walls don't work. Walls do a fine job keeping animals out, though even animals often figure out that they can just dig under it. When humans come across a wall, they don't just throw their hands up and turn around. They go over, under, or around it. I'm not ideologically opposed to enforcing our borders, I've made that clear previously. But a wall is a massive waste of money. Unmanned aerial vehicles, communicating with mobile ground units would be more effective and much cheaper. Build that wall rolls of the tongue easier as a campaign slogan, other than that it's useless and impractical.
  23. Mr. Brooks
    Why would they have to pay them $15 per hour?
  24. Mr. Brooks
    Well plus, a wall isn't going to stop anyone. Miraculously, roofers are still able to re shingle houses, despite all the walls they have to contend with.
  25. Mr. Brooks
    In poker we call that "a fish on a heater". Toronto is terrible.
×
×
  • Create New...