Jump to content
Join us for draft day two conversation, click here! ×
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

Mike Sixel

Old-Timey Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    46,996

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    330

 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 Pick Tracker

Forums

Blogs

Events

Store

Downloads

Gallery

Everything posted by Mike Sixel

  1. Mike Sixel
    I'm sorry, but I guess when I read "might be one hit wonder".....that implies to me that you don't think he's going to play well next year. So, I'll ask, which is it? do you think he's going to be above average at catcher, or not? One of the best things I learned in communications is that message sent, is not necessarily message received. Clearly, I received your message as doubting Garver. Nothing more or less, no "gotcha" or anything on my part.
  2. Mike Sixel
    That's not what your post said, it clearly implied you didn't think it likely he would still be valuable. He'll be valuable, but maybe not that valuable. OTOH, maybe they'll let him hit when he's not catching, and he'll be more valuable even if his rate stats drop..... Saying he won't be one of the three best catchers in baseball is very different than saying he won't have much value. I'm guessing he's above average, at least, again.
  3. Mike Sixel
    I don't see a third pitch, as pointed out above. I don't see this happening.
  4. Mike Sixel
    He was minor league player of the year, and hit at every level. Why don't people believe he can hit?
  5. Mike Sixel
    Of course, none of that has a whit to do with my post.......You said that signing players has risk and no one ever mentions that. Not signing players also has risk, and that is rarely mentioned. Now is the time, we'll see what happens.
  6. Mike Sixel
    His offense has literally gotten worse each of the last two years.....He was just above MLB average this year, an average that includes pitchers and catchers...... That's just on offense. BTW, I don't see anyone saying he's bad.....just that he's not all that great. You keep him unless keeping him impedes your ability to fix pitching....but once they have a rookie OFer ready, there isn't much reason to keep Eddie Rosario at the price he'll be getting paid the next two years.
  7. Mike Sixel
    How well is not making a big move working out? that also carries risk..... I'd 100% rather see the Twins make moves like Cole, Verlander, Greinke, than Perez. Odo was a good trade, but good luck repeating that. Are we supposed to acknowledge that in every post we make?
  8. Mike Sixel
    Tampa doesn't have three holes in its starting pitching, nor does it have obvious defensive holes. The Twins also have around 60-70 million in payroll space, just to get back to last year's total.
  9. Mike Sixel
    Kepler was cheaper and younger......so I'm not sure how it's the same. I doubt they deal Eddie, but the OP was realistic, thanks,
  10. Mike Sixel
    The 8 million is added to whatever else they can spend.......I'm not sure how that's debatable even. It frees up 8 million more dollars to spend. And probably 10 million next year.
  11. Mike Sixel
    Agreed, unless as was posted, they need the savings for three really good starting pitchers.
  12. Mike Sixel
    I'm guessing those fans are in different camps.... He's a below average corner OF who is getting expensive.
  13. Mike Sixel
    i can't see how a team on a mid-market budget keeps Rosario over time, and deals Kepler.....
  14. Mike Sixel
    Of course, the newest fielding stats take into account positioning..... And yes, defensive stats often fluctuate A LOT more than hitting ones, year to year......Rosario could be good again on D, but believing he was good last year is just denial.
  15. Mike Sixel
    I agree, I'm arguing we have no idea at this point what Wes Johnson is as a coach.....just no sample yet. Therefore, I'd prefer we sign guys that are already good.....just in case he's not a genius like we all hope. edit: but we keep reading stuff like "can he work his magic"...when we just don't know if he has any
  16. Mike Sixel
    There aren't any defensive stats that like him as an OFer......I doubt it's the math that is the problem here.
  17. Mike Sixel
    Of course, he was in the Twins' system for two years.....and he had options......
  18. Mike Sixel
    What magic has Wes worked? Which starting pitcher was much better this year than last? Not Berrios,not Perez, not Odo, not really sure how to judge Pineda or Gibson..... What evidence do we have about Johnson, really, other than Perez? Which is a tiny sample size.....
  19. Mike Sixel
    Same exact conversation we had about Mauer..........
  20. Mike Sixel
    Did any of those surprises come from outside the org, that were previously awful, and then fixed? Like, perez...
  21. Mike Sixel
    I prefer guys they aren't sure of have options. I hated the bullpen two years ago for that reason. They couldn't move anyone around. I don't want them in the same position ever again.
  22. Mike Sixel
    Not a fan of picking up players that haven't been good, if they are out of options. but whatever. I prefer my bullpen to mostly be great pitchers, or guys with options that can go down and up.
  23. Mike Sixel
    Do you think people running teams ignore culture? I'd guess winning creates a happy work place more than the people, unless the people are over the top negative, like an outlier.
  24. Mike Sixel
    It can have an effect for sure, but it's it a necessary ingredient? Can you predict it, until players actually spend time together? Would you get rid of the best player on your team if three guys didn't get along with him? I think it's a big part of the managers job, but adjusting players on the team should be about talent, imo.
  25. Mike Sixel
    Chemistry is almost always a post hoc argument. Do people really think every bad team has bad chemistry, and every good team good? No chance.
×
×
  • Create New...