Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

Mr. Brooks

Verified Member
  • 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. True, it's not impossible to win the powerball. But, I sure wouldn't plan on it. The Dodgers would be crazy to trade their top 2 prospects for Dozier- a good but not elite player. Maybe they are crazy, I hope they are.
  2. I'm saying you can still get a good deal without demanding their top 2 prospects. That just isn't happening. For Mike Trout? Sure. Not for Brian Dozier. You can make an unrealistic demand, fine. But that is the same as not even making an offer.
  3. So your stance is to keep Dozier? Asking for Urias or DeLeon AND Bellinger is just not realistic. Dozier is a nice player, and you should get a good deal or don't trade him. There are realistic trades with the Dodgers, but calling them and asking for 2 completely unrealistic packages or nothing is just insulting them.
  4. That list on mlb.com is not a complete list. It's a list of teams top 30 prospects that are eligible.
  5. Mejia should be in the rotation opening day, IMO. But even then we probably don't need to open any more spots, unless the new guys think Duffey belongs in the rotation. Berrios May Gibson Mejia Santiago Of course, this assumes they trade Santana and don't find a starter in FA. If they hold on to Erv or bring in a guy with a guaranteed spot then I could see needing to open a spot.
  6. That is an impressive feat by the training staff if they went 3 straight years using only 5 starting pitchers.
  7. Baker was a pretty good pitcher. I'd be thrilled if Gibson turned into Scott Baker. They can't all be aces.
  8. They named his hometown after him? This guy is a legend!
  9. Though in the end you might be right that everyone else gets tendered, I don't think that means that these decisions were already made. It could just mean that Plouffe was the only obvious one, so they made it right away to give him a head start in FA, and to have his 40 man spot available for Rule V protections. Santiago- they could have wanted more time to see what the interest in Ervin looks like. And also to see what the FA market looks like in terms of years and $. Bullpen guys- might have wanted more time to see what the prices look like, and to evaluate internal options. Escobar is probably an obvious tender, as is Gibson. Edit: Also, and I could be wrong, but I think with players who are a consideration to come back at a cheaper price, it makes more sense to non tender as opposed to releasing. I'm not sure any of these guys fit that possibility though, perhaps Santiago.
  10. As you know, I'm not a believer in Gibson. Never was, even during his 15 season. But yeah, his tender price is so insanely low for a starting pitcher that I think you have to bring him back. If he had the $8 million tag, I'd say it's an easy non tender.
  11. Regression to the mean would likely mean matching his xFIP- which would be a bad thing. I think it would be more accurate to say that we need to hope he defies regression to the mean as he did in 12 through 15.
  12. So because you are in favor of the moves that means that anyone who isn't is a "hater"? I mean, I'm in favor of the moves as well, but I don't feel my opinion on it is superior to those who disagree.
  13. For a post decrying negativity and fault finding, your post sure has a lot of negativity and fault finding.
  14. Just about every team's arbitration list is back of the roster guys. If you are a player every team would want, you get a contract extension before, or shortly into arbitration years.
  15. No, I didn't say they should have done it by now. I must have misunderstood you. I thought you meant it would be unrealistic to do it this offseason. I belive the subject you responded to was how do you feel if this ends up being the biggest move of the offseason.
  16. I guess I don't even understand what you are getting at here. Are you saying that figuring out Dozier and/or Santana's trade value is something that takes more than one offseason to do? There isn't much unknown about those 2 guys, and both Falvey and Levine come from other MLB front offices so they would be pretty familiar with prospects around the league as well. I don't see how these two have much, if any, disadvantage attempting to trade one of those players, compared to if they'd been here 10 years.
  17. His contract is not prohibitive at all. It's basically a wash with Dozier's- who would be leaving in this deal.
  18. Puig is the definition of a lottery ticket. I'd absolutely take him back as long as it's a toss in and not a main piece. There really is no risk on a 103 loss team.
  19. I get not burning it down and starting over, but isn't there some middle ground there? Bruno and Jerry White, those are the only guys in the entire organization that Levine and Falvey have cut loose, am I correct? I guess I figured that as completely awful as this organization has been the last 6 years, there might have been at least a few guys in the milb/scouting/training/analytics that haven't been getting the job done. Now, of course, I'm not bailing. I still have high hopes for these guys and faith. But I'm definitely viewing them a bit more suspiciously than I was the day they were introduced. If the idea is to take a year to familiarize themselves with everyone before making any firings, then I can accept that, but I hope that the people here who are expecting is to compete in the next 2 years realize that that essentially pushes the pause button for a full year. I'm OK with that, I can accept the long view (if it works), but I know there are a few here who aren't going to be happy if it's a 4 or 5 year project.
  20. Wisconsin doesn't have any fundamental advantage over us. There is zero reason our goal shouldn't be to develop into the type of program they have. And I'm fine if it takes 10 years to get where Wisconsin is now. I'm not impatient. My frustration is that that's not even the goal, as admitted by the booster above.
  21. At least they had the courage to just come right out and say what I've long believed- that they strive for "respectability" and not excellence.
  22. Figuring out if the Yankees hitters benefit would be the harder part.
  23. I'm curious if there is evidence that the Yankees get a more beneficial strike zone, or is that just your opinion?
  24. I'd be surprised if Suzuki ended up getting more than a ST invite from anyone. I said that at the deadline when people were wondering why he wasn't traded. He simply doesn't belong behind the plate anymore, and obviously can't hit enough for anywhere else.
  25. When your QB is one of the worst in the country, there shouldn't be any pressure to be loyal to him. Luckily we only have to watch him one more time. I feel worst for the rest of the Seniors who know they'd be undefeated, have possession of the axe finally, going to the Big 10 championship game, and possibly playoffs if they had an average or better QB. They will be better next year, losing the burden of Leidner guarantees that. But, they could be better and still not win more games. The schedule made this the year to take and they blew it. Kill blew it by leaving us with Leidner, and Claeys blew it not even trying another option. Gophers football doesn't deserve the axe.
×
×
  • Create New...