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
    That's different. In that case, the murderer would be in jail until trial. You would have prevented future crimes. That's not the case here. Reporting what you've been told here would have zero effect on preventing a future crime.
  2. Mr. Brooks
    How would Nick reporting what he was told be able to prevent any future incidents? Do you really think they would have locked Sano away without bail?
  3. Mr. Brooks
    Excellent post. These are all examples of issues/behaviors that need to be aggressively addressed.
  4. Mr. Brooks
    I'm not sure what the legal definition of sexual assault is. But, for practical purposes, if an assault occurred, and the underlying motivation for that assault was sexual in nature, then I'd consider it fair to discuss that as sexual assault. Public opinion is not the same as a court of law, and frankly I'm getting tired of people attempting to transfer legal rights and definitions into workplace and/or public opinion situations. (This is a bit of a side tangent, I'm not accusing you of doing this. ) Freedom of speech, right to due process, burden of proof, etc. Those are rights meant to protect us from government persecution. They rarely extend beyond that.
  5. Mr. Brooks
    Well that's just factually incorrect. That's not even close to what it means to be accomplice to a crime. What exactly was Nick supposed to do? If he goes to the police and says his friend told him she was assaulted 2 years ago, they are going to say, "okay, tell your friend to come file a report. Until she does, there is zero we can or will do. " What did that accomplish? Destroying a friend's trust for absolutely no gain whatsoever. I hope, for their sake, a friend of yours never confides anything personal and private to you.
  6. Mr. Brooks
    It depends on the context. In this case, he's learning it first hand from the accuser- and was likely asked not to share it. There are other contexts where it would be appropriate to go to the authorities.
  7. Mr. Brooks
    Have you considered that the accuser might have asked Nick, and others that she told, to keep it private until she was ready to come forward?
  8. Mr. Brooks
    In her statement, she says she screamed- singular. As far as I can tell, she never claims, or implies that she screamed continuously for 10 minutes.
  9. Mr. Brooks
    I don't have technical expertise, so perhaps this isn't plausible. But, regarding the inability to merge breaking news threads into articles, can't you just pre-date the article to 1 minute before the breaking news thread, so that when merged, they merge into the article?
  10. Mr. Brooks
    My whole point is that they shouldn't have a bias. Saying they should give internal prospects a shot over outside players is the argument that seems biased to me. Simply being "our" prospect shouldn't carry any additional weight when evaluating whether a guy can contribute or not.
  11. Mr. Brooks
    Maybe, but probably not. One guy, even as good as Darvish, can't turn a rotation from poor to great. If a prospect emerges, it likely won't be a difference maker until 2019. Remember how much Berrios struggled his first season, and he was a better prospect than any of the pitching prospects we have now.
  12. Mr. Brooks
    Every pitcher who has ever played the game, including the all time greats, have had 15 inning stretches of awful performance. It's too small to have any meaning whatsoever. But again, we'll agree to disagree on that point. To your second point, he is not a guy that they drafted. It's a new FO. They should evaluate him exactly the same as they would a random prospect on a random team. If they think he has a good chance, they should give him a shot, if they don't, they shouldn't. The fact that he was drafted by the Twins should not play a role in the decision. Clearly they don't think he had much chance of helping.
  13. Mr. Brooks
    I can only speak for myself, but I don't think everyone who is proposing packages necessarily want to do those trades, but rather just being realistic about what the cost would be. Archer is too costly for my tastes. I'd rather get Cole and a top FA.
  14. Mr. Brooks
    We'll agree to disagree. 15 starts would still be a very small sample size, perhaps enough to learn something, but probably not. 15 relief appearances is for all practical purposes the same as zero, as far as any evaluatorial information goes.
  15. Mr. Brooks
    I only meant it in the sense of giving prospects a shot that they don't feel should get one, just because it's "their" guy. I keep hearing people say stuff like, "you'd think they'd at least give them a shot before they lose them, since it's their prospect." I didn't mean it in an us/ours vs. them/theirs adversarial sense.
  16. Mr. Brooks
    I'm on the same side of the coin as you. It shouldn't matter where the prospect came from- I was responding to someone saying Bard should have gotten a shot over someone from outside the organization, because he's our prospect.
  17. Mr. Brooks
    These are not their prospects. These are the previous regime's prospects. We need to keep that in mind. I'm sure a few years from now, when guys they actually chose and groomed are coming up, the process will be different.
  18. Mr. Brooks
    15 appearances by a relief pitcher is far too tiny of a sample size to gain any information whatsoever from.
  19. Mr. Brooks
    Yeah, that's my point. It's a no brainer guaranteed investment. That should give you pause to wonder why the other side would consider that.
  20. Mr. Brooks
    Whether he's ultimately a hall of famer is certainly a fair argument. But, not even receiving enough consideration to stay on the ballot is a joke.
  21. Mr. Brooks
    Actually, drafting Kinley would make it more likely that Bard would have needed to be DFA'd later, because that's one less available 40 man spot. They are 2 different roster moves. They obviously see something with Kinley. They may well be wrong, but that's not my point.
  22. Mr. Brooks
    Well the Twins have a long way to go just to reach passable bullpen. I don't think a super bullpen is in the cards, for 2018 anyway.
  23. Mr. Brooks
    I thought Frankie was #47 for the Twins?
  24. Mr. Brooks
    I believe the argument is that he was unprotected so they wouldn't have to DFA him later. In other words, the FO thought they were less likely to lose him this way- since it's more restrictive to take a Rule V guy than a DFA. The FO lost that gamble, but that was the theory, I think.
  25. Mr. Brooks
    What am I missing here? What, even theoretically, would cause a team to choose their own guy? Why wouldn't they just protect him to begin with in that case?
×
×
  • Create New...