Jump to content
If free agency is too rich for your blood, click here for the 35 players most likely to be traded this offseason. ×
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

Mike Sixel

Old-Timey Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    48,924

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    340

 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 Mike Sixel

  1. Mike Sixel
    That is quite the fall for Stewart! Wow. (Meyer too, but I'm not as surprised by that one). Really, think about that. BPRO thought they had 2 number 1/2 types, and now neither is even thought of as a number 2/3 type, and maybe not even a starter (for Meyer). Wow.
  2. Mike Sixel
    Then why were none of them up last year (Rogers, for example) if that was the plan? I'm all for that plan, if they implement it. But we all know the first 2 months, they'll go with the veterans. That's 1/3 of the season. Then they'll explain that we can't expect the young guys to be good right away, that's another month gone where they don't trust them and use them in the highest leverage situation. That's half the year, of not really putting their money where their mouth is. Either play the young guys, and let them fail and learn, or don't. But all this half way stuff doesn't work.
  3. Mike Sixel
    1. We don't really know how much they are, or are not making. 2. Next year is terrible for FAs, so there is already a built in excuse next year also. 3. They could afford 1-2 RPs. They have decided instead to go with "dude was tipping his pitches, but we can fix that" and, well, we aren't sure about the rest of the plan. 4. This probably does not make them favorites, but, always not signing guys because you aren't 1 player away is a self-fulfilling prophecy. 5. There are always reasons not to spend money, But, this is the business they've chosen to be in. Ignoring one way to sign really good players (not mediocre ones) puts you at a disadvantage in acquiring talent, I'd think. 6. I don't see this changing, ever, so I should probably stop caring, frankly.
  4. Mike Sixel
    how about both? https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjC5YnfwMrKAhWDuoMKHbWOANEQjRwIBw&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.whosay.com%2Fstatus%2Fsofiavergara%2F437536&psig=AFQjCNEphWPmjRyPAGeYhhJfEOJV3vwfrA&ust=1454001740423227 edit: trying to listen to my boss in a meeting right now.......trying....
  5. Mike Sixel
    I'm with you on this, IF they let the young guys fail some before giving up on them (since most RPs fail quite often).
  6. Mike Sixel
    I only gave up sugar......
  7. Mike Sixel
    Until we see them trust young RPs with lots of walks, why would we think it will happen? We largely agree that they SHOULD do it, but they have not done so in the past.
  8. Mike Sixel
    Hey, I'm all in on going young, but they didn't even promote Rogers last year to test him out. NOT ONE young guy was brought up in September. IF that is their strategy, why would you not do that?
  9. Mike Sixel
    And who did they have at RP last year, that should not be blocked, that stopped them from spending?
  10. Mike Sixel
    Shenandoah? My Aunt and uncle live there, that is not a city you see referenced often.
  11. Mike Sixel
    I have clearly admitted my stance is based on fanaticism edited to remove something....
  12. Mike Sixel
    It will be interesting to find out. Clearly, they believe. Now, this is the same group that thought Stauffer was good, and the young players would step up, so color me skeptical. This is the same group that has built the last 4 bullpens, right?
  13. Mike Sixel
    I don't see anyone saying "oh, great, we're set", or did I miss something?
  14. Mike Sixel
    So, if the other teams spend the same as they do now, that does or does not stop the Twins from spending more? Really, the Twins decide how much they spend, right? If they really wanted to, they could have bid on an elite pitcher this year, but they didn't want to. What the industry does does not determine what the Twins do. It certainly influences it, but it doesn't determine it. I have no issue with the employees making more money......none at all. I'd love it if the Twins paid their employees more.
  15. Mike Sixel
    Why not? If money doesn't matter, why not fire an employee that is not doing his job? I'm not being flip here, I'm actually trying to understand why not? It isn't money, if you are replacing him with an entry level employee. So why not? In other industries they tend to fire people that get a 1 on their performance review (though probably not fast enough, really).
  16. Mike Sixel
    And yet, their revenues would support another 10-30MM in payroll, and still keep profits high, assuming they can make money at 50% spent on payroll......
  17. Mike Sixel
    I agree, it is easy for me to say this, sitting here. That said, maybe they should be. The player still gets paid, it's not like when normal people get fired and held accountable and replaced by a better employee......Most businesses really struggle with firing people. I was just having this discussion with a VP this am, actually.....
  18. Mike Sixel
    If money doesn't matter, and you are under budget, you just cut a guy that is blocking a player. Then call up a guy making less than $500K a year. Heck, I'd think you could fit that into any MLB budget.... I do get your point about not blocking players. I just don't agree that if it is about staying under a budget (not about spending the "right" way), that you can't just cut Nolasco (if he's bad) after a month. Which RP was blocked last year, that they just didn't have room to add one at the beginning of the year?
  19. Mike Sixel
    Every year there is a reason not to spend money.....every year.
  20. Mike Sixel
    I think Seth is pretty much right on in his predictions. I hope they don't wait long on the FTM guys moving up, if they have success.
  21. Mike Sixel
    Agreed. The worst thing him being is mediocre, not bad enough to replace, not good enough to put the team in position to win consistently.
  22. Mike Sixel
    Teams don't trade in April/May....if Nolasco is good, he's here until June/July.
  23. Mike Sixel
    There is a nice article about Kyle Gibson on Fangraphs today... READ: http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/the-unusually-compelling-kyle-gibson-just-a-tweak-away/
  24. Mike Sixel
    Preach it. Otherwise we'll hear how he can't be in the bullpen because he's not used to it.
  25. Mike Sixel
    If that is the MARKET price, it isn't overpaying, is it? If you have $20mm in budget space, does it matter if you overpay for 1 guy by $2M or so, if it makes the team better? Maybe, but probably not. Years are about money, right, not wanting to have money spent on a player in 3 years that isn't worth it, even if you have budget room? If there is room in the budget, why not "over spend", other than putting money over winning?
×
×
  • Create New...