Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

Mike Sixel

Old-Timey Member
  • Posts

    46,376
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    329

 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 Mike Sixel

  1. if that was their plan, they would have traded Dozier, no? They would have traded ESan, no? I don't see evidence of a tear down and rebuild at all.
  2. Only 47 qualified hitters hit .287 or higher last year. I'd be thrilled if Polanco was in that group, and played decent enough SS.
  3. And do you really want them making cuts/changes after 2 weeks of data? If so, why not just start with those guys?
  4. Let's recall, just 20 or 30 days ago, they DFA'd Park. In some ways, not letting ST change their mind is good... As for not getting younger, Berrios and Chargois and Murphy are off the roster, two of whom were replaced by older players that won't be here in 2 years, maybe 1, maybe only a few months. Here is who they added: Castro, Gimenez, Belisle, Breslow, Haley, Mejia. I don't think Gimenez, Belisle, and Breslow will be on the next good team this team fields. They aren't exactly young. Castro might be, but he's not spring chicken (to be clear, I like the signing, but he will be a backup in 2 years probably). Haley is the annual rule V pick that can't be cut no matter how bad he is, even if there are guys in the minors about as good. We can hope that this time it turns out. Mejia is the one young guy they really added, but his upside is number 4 starter, more likely he is a nice innings eater and a 4/5. So, where is the upside? Where are the risks? Where did they get younger? The fact that they are young has nothing to do with this FO, they inherited a young team. Where did this FO take a risk on a young player with upside?
  5. Somehow I am out of likes for the day. Now, I know that's not possible, since it is only 721 am here.....
  6. This team got older, with no ceiling to be good in a year or two. No chances at all are being taken on high upside players that weren't already on the 25 man roster. Indeed, they somehow managed to decrease the number of guys from the end of last year that were young with upside. On a 103 loss team...
  7. At the rate they are fixing problems, the Twins should be great in 15 years, assuming everyone they bring on is still good then.... On a more serious note, people keep typing the following: "it's not a big deal, they can just cut him in a few weeks" "no big deal, they'll make adjustments in a few weeks" "they won't carry 13 pitchers for long" How do you know any of this? All we can go on is their actual actions. Their actual actions were all about bringing in veterans, and keeping DanSan and 13 pitchers on the roster. There is no evidence, at all, that decisions were driven by best performances, since none of the guys that were here before they came, that were not on the 40 man, made the roster. Only guys they acquired were added from off the 40 man. So, I guess what I'm saying is, we don't know at all what they are going to do, but we sure as heck know what they did. And what they did, so far, isn't pretty.
  8. the "young" arms are 25-27 years old. They are literally losing velocity today.
  9. I would guess Kepler is the backup 1B, yes. 13 pitchers, with off days. Must be some kind of stat head nerd geek thing no else has thought of....
  10. Fair, i would not deal him. I think he's still a possible long term 4+ WAR player.
  11. You realize there are entire treatises on the interwebs about this, right? You can believe the math, or not, up to you.
  12. And yet, that same manager is in charge of his usage this year.....I hope he's learned.
  13. next year, next year, next year.......been reading that here for three years now. Remember when people debated if the Cubs or Astros were ahead of the Twins, just last year? Good times.
  14. If we think he's not great, why would a GM give up 3-4 prospects, including a pitcher in the top 10 - 20 prospects in teh game?
  15. Can't. Tell. If. Serious. If so, why? Based on what, in the last two years?
  16. I have a bit of hope for Tonkin, if he's used in 1 inning bursts....call me naive and overly hopeful, but I do.
  17. According to fangraphs, the Twins have a number 3, and a bunch of number 4/5/6 types. Also, no one is suggesting they need to have five number 1 starters. Also, you can sign a FA to a long term deal, so that when they are good, that player is still here. If they aren't good in the next 3-4 years, they will have wasted Buxton and Sano.
  18. A team can work on the bullpen and the rotation and hitters all at the same time. This thread is about the bullpen
  19. Sure, whatever, but giving them a pass on this seems a bit overly forgiving to me....I'd like to see this team "wing it" by betting on an unproven young guy as a RP, just one time, out of the gate.
  20. Agreed, as long as Molitor is here, I don't know how anyone could feel good about the bullpen.
  21. I wouldn't change a number from what Seth wrote. I also predict adequate defense.
  22. Well, the stats are ambivalent on if he's the 3rd or 5th worst player in all of MLB the last two years.....you just can't trust them with that kind of variance.
×
×
  • Create New...