Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

The Great Hambino

Verified Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    2,118

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    7

 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

2026 Minnesota Twins Draft Tracker: Picks & Bonuses

Forums

Blogs

Events

Store

Downloads

Gallery

Everything posted by The Great Hambino

  1. The Great Hambino
    That is true. I was thinking of the picks - the one received by the former team and the one given up by the new team - as tied together. Dropping the penalty but keeping the reward would certainly maintain the QO's relevance.
  2. The Great Hambino
    Without the draft pick provision, then the QO process has no meaning. At that point it's just like any other free agent offer. The draft pick compensation is the QO system. What purpose does it serve without it?
  3. The Great Hambino
    I don't think anyone looking to trade for a rental catcher would be interested in giving up pieces that help you win now, whether that's in the bullpen or elsewhere. But the Twins don't necessarily have to get their pen help directly through one trade. If they traded Jeffers for prospects (it's not impossible that someone out there is willing to give up pen pieces for him, but I gotta believe your market will be bigger and your return more valuable if you accept prospects) and also traded prospects for relief help (doesn't have to be the same prospects you received for Jeffers), they've effectively landed where you'd be if you'd have swapped Jeffers for relief help, only you've had more flexibility to find the right relievers. They could accomplish this in a three-team trade, I suppose, if the third team was supplying the relievers. I guess my point is I hope they don't shop Jeffers with too narrow a scope regarding the return, since how they net out after all their trades is what really matters
  4. The Great Hambino
    I have to agree here. At the end of the day, Lackey will probably be two levels below Jenkins when he debuts even though Jenkins only a few months older. Hard to justify leapfrogging him without proving it to some degree. In fact, I could probably be convinced that he's currently closer to Culpepper than Jenkins, at least until he confirms some of the hype
  5. The Great Hambino
    It would be great for multiple reasons if they had Buxton insurance they trusted enough in CF to keep Kreidler and Clemens in the infield (you coulda won a lot of money off me if you'd bet me before the season that I'd be saying this sentence unironically). If Martin/Roden/Keaschall/et. al. don't provide that insurance at this time in their eyes, does that open up the door for perhaps a utility IF upgrade over Arcia/Gray as a trade target? Or maybe a true CF (less desirable IMO - I'd hope a viable internal option emerges)? This iteration of the Twins is at its best if Kreidler/Kody can either stay on the dirt or have a better fill-in available if they have to move to CF for a stretch.
  6. The Great Hambino
    One thing I've thought about regarding the QO and the potential of offering it to Jeffers: Are we absolutely sure the draft pick compensation it comes with will still exist in the new CBA? The players hate it, and the owners actually offered scrapping it in their latest offer. If both sides are fine with it disappearing, should we really be counting on it? Maybe it does end up staying in some form, or maybe the changes don't take effect until the following year, or maybe existing offers get grandfathered in. But it's already a stretch to offer any catcher $23MM even for just one season. Does it make it less worth it to make the offer if there's potentially no draft pick compensation anymore? Or is it moot because the price tag of QO'ing a catcher is just too high anyway? I dunno, just spitballing here
  7. The Great Hambino
    I generally agree with the overall point that the best time to trade away relievers is at the deadline while the best time to trade away starters can be in the offseason under the right circumstances due to supply and demand factors that I'll save for another day and another rant. But this is not a typical offseason. No one is giving up anything of real value for someone with one year of control when they aren't sure what they're actually getting for that control while the season is still up in the air. If you're thinking you can just move Ryan in the offseason, you're making a massive gamble that they'll be avoiding a lockout (they will not be avoiding a lockout). If that doesn't happen, what are teams giving up when what they're getting is a mystery box? Too many unknowns to think you can maximize Ryan's value in the offseason. So trade him this deadline or actually commit to competing while you still have him. I suppose one angle they could be taking is there could be a post-CBA environment where they'll be in a position to be able to offer him more than any other team in free agency if something similar to the NBA's Larry Bird rights materializes (plus some combo of revenue sharing and a floor that makes increased spending both more realistic and necessary), and they can more realistically view him as part of the core of the next few years. But assuming that is coming is also a huge gamble.
  8. The Great Hambino
    The Twins were last at .500 when they were 12-12. Since then, they've had 4 opportunities to return to .500. They've lost all 4. Sisyphus was a Twins fan
  9. The Great Hambino
    *Banda
  10. The Great Hambino
    The stuff is obvious but I think he's been dancing through the raindrops a bit with all the walks. An ERA of 1.65 with a WHIP of 1.531 coming into today feels ... unsustainable
  11. The Great Hambino
    It's tough to know how teams are treating next season in terms of the value of controlling a player for that year, especially for players controlled only through next year. Take Joe Ryan, for instance: normally there would be a lot of value in getting a guy with a full extra year of control. But if the value of that extra year is diminished to a meaningful degree by next year's uncertainty, does his potential return look more like that of a rental? It's also looking like a seller's market with all the teams still potentially in some form of contention, so does that mitigate whatever value is lost to some degree? I have no idea what that answer is, and I think a lot of teams might not either. I think that could help cause a lot of teams to avoid major moves in favor of rentals and more marginal additions. This is why I voted for Buxton to receive the biggest potential haul in trade. I think control beyond 2027 will carry a lot of value relative to control in only 2027. I also don't think they will or should trade Buxton. I think it speaks more to a surprisingly underwhelming market for Ryan given the uncertainty
  12. The Great Hambino
    It sort of had the feel of the alternate broadcasts ESPN likes to do with some of their big events like McAfee & company in the College Football Playoff or the Manning brothers on Monday Night Football. If they were going to do this more regularly, it would probably be more appropriate as an alternate feed with a traditional broadcast still available. I get why they don't do it this way, probably not financially worthwhile to set up the alternate feed and whatnot. But as a rare one-off a game or series at a time? It's not the end of the world.
  13. The Great Hambino
    All I know is I'll have some of whatever Denard was having last night
  14. The Great Hambino
    Boy, it sure seems like the Twins have been on the other side of these kinds of games against that club a lot lately ... this feels nice!
  15. The Great Hambino
    Have they tried unplugging the bullpen and plugging it back in?
  16. The Great Hambino
    Jeez, even the broadcast is dumping on the broadcast
  17. The Great Hambino
    Royce was not the unluckiest player in that exchange
  18. The Great Hambino
    You know how if you go far enough to the east, you'll eventually be west? On a related note, I'm kinda starting to like this setup
  19. The Great Hambino
    It would be so on brand to hand out cash at the park and then not accept it for food or merch
  20. The Great Hambino
    He got flustered by the boss and couldn't pull out of the tailspin
  21. The Great Hambino
    And lo, the broadcast hath briefly reduced to a partial screen And there was weeping, and gnashing of teeth
  22. The Great Hambino
    Alan!
  23. The Great Hambino
    Booth: What are you trying to do here? Plouffe: I'm trying to get the ball in the air Royce: [immediately chops it into the ground foul] Well done working the walk in the end
  24. The Great Hambino
    Plouffe seems really impressed by the straightness of the foul line. They're really making the most of this announcing setup Good opening inning from Prielipp
  25. The Great Hambino
    That sounds nice from the Twins' perspective, but I highly doubt anyone looking to rent Jeffers would be interested in parting with any win-now pieces. Maybe a third team getting involved could help facilitate it, but straight up? I'm not seeing it
×
×
  • Create New...