Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

Mike Sixel

Old-Timey Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    48,343

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    337

 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 Mike Sixel

  1. Mike Sixel
    that appears to be the argument being made by some here, yes. Of course, prospects aren't traded for each other, so you are trading multiple prospects with many years of control for 1 player with less years of control.....
  2. Mike Sixel
    Good stuff! Thanks to both sides of the conversation!
  3. Mike Sixel
    Well, they could have had Rooker w/o going under slot in pick 1, so I'm not sure that's a good look at the outcomes. Which sounds better? Any player+Rooker+number 40ish player vs Lewis+Rooker+number 29. Given that, I'm not sure I don't like the first one (using your rankings). Really, they must really like Lewis a lot more than number 5, if they planned to take Rooker all along.
  4. Mike Sixel
    And, you are giving up 5-7 years of control of more than 1 player, for 2-3 years of control for 1 player.....you can't afford to miss that way. Not even a little. Imagine if they trade Gordon and Jorge for a number 4-5 type they only control for 3 years....
  5. Mike Sixel
    I'm not rejecting it at all......but it isn't any easier to trade for a cost controlled guy than it is to draft one. You may recall acquiring Vance Worley, Alex Meyer, and Trevor May recently, for example.
  6. Mike Sixel
    He didn't catch this year hardly at all, and forgot how to hit.
  7. Mike Sixel
    it's really stupid to pay off a zero percent loan, sir. sorry to be so blunt, but it's FREE MONEY.
  8. Mike Sixel
    they could, but it's stupid according to every former FO person on the web. 1. You don't know if next year is better 2. you lose a year of you having control 3. you lose someone you could trade earlier....... lots of reasons punting on a high pick is a bad, bad, bad idea.
  9. Mike Sixel
    they also need pitching in 4 years, and they'll need those hitters they traded away then also. Plus, they'll be trading 5-7 years of control (of 1-3 guys) for maybe 2-3 years of control, if lucky. And, both Wright and McKay were said to be fairly likely to pitch in the majors next year, not in 2+ years.
  10. Mike Sixel
    It's not clear to me that it is as easy to get controllable SP in trade as your posts are implying....
  11. Mike Sixel
    I'd probably just sell off enough every month to make payments, but I understand your thought process.
  12. Mike Sixel
    Right, I left off age. He's only 3-5 years from his most likely peak. And 1-3 of those will be in the minors.
  13. Mike Sixel
    He was all helium, so there is some doubt about his ability. Plus, he's probably a 1B/DH. That's all I can find, given his hitting.
  14. Mike Sixel
    The MLB draft, for teams way up at the top especially, is one of game theory. I think trying to control this many moving pieces would be kind of fun, frankly.
  15. Mike Sixel
    Who will you get better than them, that is controllable for more than 2 years? Because I'm not trading Gordon and a SP in AA for a rental. I'm not even trading Gordon alone for a rental. No way.
  16. Mike Sixel
    or they disagree.
  17. Mike Sixel
    Eric A Longenhagen 2:30 Twins take Chipola 3B Andrew Bechtold. Above average bat speed, could be bat-first utility guy. http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/eric-longenhagen-prospects-chat-mlb-draft-day-2/
  18. Mike Sixel
    I'm sure no one expected Carlson to go to Seattle.....let's just hope these guys are good, they need some good players.
  19. Mike Sixel
    Ignoring the risk he doesn't drop, yes. there is risk there....
  20. Mike Sixel
    From Fangraphs chat right now: Minnesota picks LHP Charlie Barnes from Clemson to start 4th round #96 on my top 100, potential plus changeup. 1:50 87-90 for me in Louisville a few weeks ago. I think there is video also, but it's blocked at work, so I 'm not sure. http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/eric-longenhagen-prospects-chat-mlb-draft-day-2/
  21. Mike Sixel
    I like the SPEED of this round.
  22. Mike Sixel
    Definitely. Expect 2-3 more.
  23. Mike Sixel
    It sure would have made more sense. And seems riskier.
  24. Mike Sixel
    I do like this pick. And, they have MONEY!
  25. Mike Sixel
    mike sixel 1:07 The Twins seemed to over draft (under slot) all three guys. Assuming spreading 200K around on lesser players doesn't really matter, what's their plan, do you think? Eric A Longenhagen 1:07 Heard they were on other Boras advisees during last night's selections but nothing came to fruition. Lewis is a Boras guy, so maybe the Twins are doing some math together with Scott and we'll see them show their work today? They're picking now. 1:08 Blayne Enlow, RHP, St. Amat HS (LA) 1:09 #33 overall on my board, chance for plus fastball and curveball, had one of the better max curveball spin rates measured on the showcase circuit (2700+ rpm) Reds take LHP Jacob Heatherly, Cullman HS (AL)
×
×
  • Create New...