Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

tobi0040

Verified Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    5,776

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    10

 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 tobi0040

  1. tobi0040
    where to? anywhere fun?
  2. tobi0040
    I only support "getting rid" of Plouffe in a trade where we are getting value back. And we should only go down that road if we are confident Sano sticks at 3B. If waiting a year ends up costing us his age 33 season and $13M....better than making this decision too early and botching it. We went a really, really long time between Koskie and Plouffe at 3B. I don't want to do that again. But you have wonder whether a .722 career OPS, .750 high end is a 3 WAR player in LF. Especially when his defense could be bad. And if we kept him, we might just be pushing a potential 4-5 WAR 3B to the OF or DH, where he will lose a few wins.
  3. tobi0040
    He is on pace for a 3 year deal this time.
  4. tobi0040
    There is one team, but he is already on that team.
  5. tobi0040
    Fixed. *If Pelfrey lets it ride three more starts and Terry gives him a 2 or 3 year extension I am going to freak out.
  6. tobi0040
    BY FIP. May, Pelfrey, Gibson, then Milone. By ERA. Pelfrey, Milone. GIbson, and May. By future. Gibson, May, Milone, and Peflrey. Milone 22.2 IP, 4.76 ERA, 6.32 FIP. 1.45 WHIP. 6.4 K per 9. Pelfrey 24 IP. 2.25 ERA. 4.47 FIP. 1.125 WHIP. 5.6 K per 9 May 14.2 IP, 4.91 ERA. 2.66 FIP. 1.159 WHIP. 8 K per 9 Gibson 22 IP. 4.84 ERA. 5.51 FIP. 1.70 WHIP. 2.4 K per 9 I would say Gibson and May are probably part of the future. Pelfrey has changed his approach, pitch mix, and velocity and has looked a lot better. So I let it ride a little longer. Milone doesn't really have any compelling reason.* *If Pelfrey lets it ride three more starts and Terry gives him a 2 or 3 year extension I am going to freak out.
  7. tobi0040
    Pelfrey has changed his pitch mix and velocity quite a bit. We should let this experiment ride and put Milone in the pen. From fangraphs: Fastball Slider Curve Split 2013 72% 10% 8% 9% 2014 80% 8% 3% 8% 2015 63% 9% 6% 23% Additionally, his average FB is 93.4, up from 90.8 last year. The split is 81.7, down from 84.1. Guessing he is throwing a different pitch altogether. http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=5203&position=P
  8. tobi0040
    Let's go the other way. Hughes - No. Gibson - Controlled young-ish with a 4.18 career FIP. No. May - Controlled. 25. Good stuff. Flashing good control. 2.66 FIP this year. No. Pelfrey or Milone - I could care less which one. My money is on May though. I am going to lose it.
  9. tobi0040
    Given the uncertainty about his position and the fact that I don't ever see him as a $15M a year player....That is my ultimate conclusion too.
  10. tobi0040
    I see a lot of Plouffe-specific commentary in his reasoning.
  11. tobi0040
    SD, I agree. I think you have a max of 2-3 starts to watch in CR for Gonsalves.
  12. tobi0040
    Yes. But to your earlier point, we have $25M extra in 2016 and 2017. So paying an additional few million isn't that big of a deal. I am okay with that right now as we don't have a gun to our head forcing anything. If he takes a 3 year deal with two individual team option years I would do it. Because I think it then upps his trade value quite a bit (team gets to save money if he is good and move on if he is not). But that probably doesn't make sense for Plouffe to sign.
  13. tobi0040
    Next off-season he is 30 and has two years of control left. I don't see him requiring a five year deal at that point. I don't see him saying no to 4/35. That is basically 2/20 over what he would make in arbitration. At that point we will have a better handle on the Sano situation. That is only $15M more with one additional season over this hypothetical 3/24 deal.
  14. tobi0040
    I personally believe the "how expensive he will get if we don't sign him" crowd is overblowing the difference between how expensive he will get and what we are saving to give him 3-24 now ($8M a year). If you throw out A-Rod, here a few of the most expensive 3B out there. Han-Ram .874 OPS @ 22M Beltre .814 OPS @ $16M 4 gold gloves Wright .870 OPS @ $15M 2 gold gloves Zimmerman .825 OPS @ $14M 1 gold glove Plouffe's career OPS is .722. If he was a free agent, I think he fetches $12M a year and he is not a free agent right now. So we are saving $12M over three years, tops. If we have oodles and oodles of money the next few years, why open the door for the negatives of this?
  15. tobi0040
    What are we saving by extending him now? Money over the next 2-3 years, which is not a scarce commodity. So to me the risk is higher than the cost. I don't want to move Sano around, a 22 year old that we will hopefully have until he is 37 because we wanted to save a few million dollars on a 29 year old Plouffe, who was probably not going to be here very long. This is not a franchise that is flexible to moving guys all around. They would not even talk about Mauer moving and moved him about two years after they should have. Then they moved him to the wrong position. And will probably never move him again.
  16. tobi0040
    I would sign him at 3-25 if we conclude Sano is not a 3B. Otherwise, I don't neccesarily agree that this deal carries no risk for us. Plouffe could regress. Or he could fail to transition to another postion, which would likely cause us moving one of the best prospects we have ever had to play out of position and in a position that will lower his WAR. If he can't play LF or RF, where does he go? If either of those things happen we will kick ourselves for having another contract that is difficult to move, or more likely another player that we play just because he has a contract If the risk of not-signing Plouffe is that he gets more expensive....but we have all this money? So is him getting a little more expensive a huge problem? To me, that is not as big of an issue as having another contract to deal with.
  17. tobi0040
    Having the money and extending Plouffe are two separate things though. Just because we have the money does not mean that it is the best decision for the Twins.
  18. tobi0040
    But the flip side is. Plouffe had a good year last year. And about a good 40-50 day streak in 2012. You hand him a 3-4 year deal and he doesn't put up another year like last year and he may not be as easy to move or valuable as we think. If you look around we have a few poor contracts already, I think you wait.
  19. tobi0040
    If Sano sticks at 3B, I think a trade of Plouffe is what will happen. Because of the value they provide at 3B (which you outline). The main reason why I think it will be Plouffe that is moved is age and cost. Sano is 22 and he will likely be a productive MLB player all the way through his 5-6 years of control. We could have him before and through his prime. Plouffe is 29 soon. And Plouffe is probably one of the 7-10 best 3B in his prime. Many project Sano as a top 3 or so, with the bat.
  20. tobi0040
    I think the Twins are a new GM away from quantifying the impact of defense to runs, then to wins.
  21. tobi0040
    I think Plouffe would be a great super utility guy, for a few reasons. Arcia is a comlplete liability against lefties, so you swap out his career .601 OPS for Plouffe's .807. And Joe has missed about 170 games over the last four years. And maybe Plouffe's ability to play almost every position in a pinch would allow us to add an actual bat on the bench. Of course you weigh this with what you can get in a trade.
  22. tobi0040
    Do you think the Twins would give 25-30M over three years to a guy that doesn't play the same position every day? I think the Rays would and I think it may make sense for the Twins if Plouffe can play LF and RF (in addition to 3B and 1B). But I really don't think the Twins would ever do that.
  23. tobi0040
    I live in a world where the Twins aren't paying super utility guy that kind of money. And if they did it would take money away from another area
  24. tobi0040
    I agree completely with this analysis and neither of these outcomes translates to we need to extend the guy now. The last thing you want to do is give him 7-9M a year to be a super utility guy that only plays 120 games.
  25. tobi0040
    Plouffe's offensive numbers represent a top 10 3B. Throw him in LF and they no longer are in that grouping. So the danger is you lock him up at 3B rates and then move him to LF. Basically the same thing we did with Mauer. We paid an elite catcher to move to 1B and be average-ish.
×
×
  • Create New...