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
    Agreed. For at least the next six to eight years, he should have pop. For at least the next four or five years he should provide plus defense and speed on the bases. Even if his average never comes around to .270-.280 or so that is a plus 2B.
  2. tobi0040
    Sickels had their sytsem at 15 in May and only one of the guys was top 10. He is likely out of the top 100, just doing a quick 5 x 30 calculation. I could be short changing the move and it may turn out to be good for them. But it has tempered my expectations for a Plouffe trade.
  3. tobi0040
    I think you only do these deals if you can get a nice discount on the free agency portion. A few of the more recent deals don't seem to accomplish that (Trout and Seager). If we can get a nice discount, I would do it. I think Dozier plays good defense and should be a 20-20 guy because I don't see those skills receeding in the next three years. So if he has a decent deal in the future, you can trade Dozier and he would have value even if he was a .250, 20-20 guy with plus defense at 2B. I think the risks of regression are lower with Dozier than with Plouffe.
  4. tobi0040
    I can't argue with that. They continue, year in and year out to find guys that everyone seems to want three years later.
  5. tobi0040
    I used to think that we would get something good via trade for Plouffe, given the scarcity at 3B. However, the Josh Donaldson trade has made me change my mind a bit. Donaldson is way better than Plouffe, career OPS + of 125, OPS of .805. Plouffe's career OPS + is 99, OPS .723. The A's only received Brett Lawrie and three prospects. Only only one of which is top 10 in their system at #5 (Barreto according to BA). http://www.baseballamerica.com/minors/2015-toronto-blue-jays-top-10-prospects-video/
  6. tobi0040
    I would want to see another 3 months for dozier. I just can't get there with plouffe. To sd's point, if things go well he is replaced at 3b. Then maybe he can play lf. Maybe he can't. His value would fall for sure The real downside is you have 40 million locked up in the second best 3b on your team. If his consistency falters again you are stuck.
  7. tobi0040
    I think it is the Seager deal that is crazy. He would probably make 20M over three years in arbitration. So they then paid him 4-80 in free agency? What is the point of doing this deal, is he going to be worth more than 20M? You do this deal to get a discount in free agency. He is not Pujols or A Rod circa 2005.
  8. tobi0040
    Well, if he has two good years the Twins will know we didn't win!
  9. tobi0040
    The other conclusion is that the "winner" submitted a bid that was less than the Korean team thought it would be.
  10. tobi0040
    Swarzak outrighted to AAA and off the 40 man. https://www.fantasysp.com/player/mlb/Anthony_Swarzak/3766816/twins-sent-rhp-anthony-swarzak-outright-to-triple-a-rochester
  11. tobi0040
    I just figured if the posting process is over, I don't know why Texas would not share something that was going to become public in a day anyway. Maybe some crazy rule I guess.
  12. tobi0040
    Step 1. Confirm your bid amount Step 2. Call the rangers and ask what their bid was Step 3. Determine if their number is higher Step 4 ( if rangers number was higher ). Confirm you did not win.
  13. tobi0040
    Awesome.
  14. tobi0040
    I am in a wait and see mode. From what I have read I am not expecting this guy in the rotation next year. But it we spend $8M over 4 years for a good reliever than that is a good deal. A lot of the international pitchers seem to have 1-2 really good years because they benefit from nobody seeing them on tape, that upside would be great for a limited commitment. However, if the early moves so far (this guy and Hunter) represent our big targets, I will be dissapointed
  15. tobi0040
    For those who would give Masterson a one year deal with an option...I would be on board with that. We should be building towards a 2016 team, so just a one year thing doesn't do much for me.
  16. tobi0040
    His career 3.7 BB per 9 rate and 1.38 WHIP are red flags for me. As are the fact that he is 30 and we are talking about mechanics, control, consistency, can't get LHB out, etc. At what point do we suspect he will click? I don't view this as more than a one year thing and we are not making a run next year. That is probably the bigger issue for me.
  17. tobi0040
    Hughes career ERA in every start outside of the New Yankee stadium was 4.10 or so. By coming to MN, you fix that problem. Hughes was also almost three years younger. Can we fix Masterson's issues? That is debateable. Our track record at doing so is not great. But that doesn't really matter to me as much as how inconsistent Masterson has been. My fear is he pitches well for 3-4 months and then we hand him a three year $45M deal. He has been way too inconsistent to extend him. He also has a good shot at being the 4.50-5.50 ERA, 1.50 WHIP guy again and our rotation is terrible again while taking reps from young players.
  18. tobi0040
    I don't understand why this wasn't the strategy in 2011-2013 when we didn't have the young pitchers ready to break through. We signed two guys, Pelfrey and Harden maybe with this in mind. Pelfrey had no upside and Harden had about a .01% chance of being healthy. I think you sign a guy that is a 2-3 year answer, one that is better than what you have or you give reps to the young guys. No in between. This feels very in between to me.
  19. tobi0040
    I guess then injuries did not play a role in 2009 (4.52 ERA, 1.45 WHIP). 2010 (4.70 ERA, 1.50 WHIP), and 2012 (4.93 ERA, 1.45 WHIP).
  20. tobi0040
    He has had two good years and is 30. Career 4.24 ERA. Mechanics issues. Injury issues. Command issues. You can't trust him on a 3-4-5 year extension if he has a good year here, IMO. And I find it ironic that his BB rate the last two years has been worse than Alex Meyer's in AA and AAA over the same period. But the BB rates are what have kept Meyer from even getting a shot to pitch for the Twins.
  21. tobi0040
    I would just give Ervin a 3 year deal with an option over Masterson or Anderson. Since his age 25 season, he had had just two clunkers in seven years. The other five, 3.49, 3.92, 3.38, 3.24, and 3.95. He has been very healthy as well.
  22. tobi0040
    If the alternative is nothing, sure, bring Anderson on board. I would prefer a guy that is helping this team in 2016 and 2017 though, like Ervin Santana. But if we do sign Anderson, I would like to see a team option for the next year. Something less than the $15M qualifying offer. If we give him one year and somehow he stays healthy and pitches well, he may want a 2-3 year deal. Would we give it to him? He has pitched 205 innings over the last four years. Seems way more risky than a one year team option for say $9-10M. It was a nice article. I do find it encouraging as well that his recent issues have not been arm or shoulder related. I do take issue with the inclusion of Mike Pelfrey in the statement "you could argue all of these guys deserve a chance". He has pitched 176 IP across two seasons for us. I calculate an ERA of 5.55, a WHIP of 1.61 with 5.6 K per 9.
  23. tobi0040
    I agree people are over-rating Masterson. He will be 30 next year and has had exactly two good full seasons. His career ERA is 4.24. I persronally think his funky delivery is one of the reasons why he is so inconsistent. I think the best case is you sign him, he pitches well, and then you flip him or get compensation when he leaves. There is a decent shot that he is here and stinks up the joint like last year. 5.88 ERA and 5 BB / 9 like you mentioned. In that scenario our rotation is just as bad or worse than it has been. His BB per 9 was actually higher last year than Meyer's was in the minors and that was supposedly why he was not promoted. If he pitches well next year, he has been too inconsistent to warrant even a 3 year extension, IMO.
  24. tobi0040
    I generally like the plan. I am a huge Rasmus guy. Signing him on a 2-3 year deal would be ideal to me. He has put up league average numbers (.751 OPS) through 22-28 seasons. He could stabilize CF and move to a corner when Buxton comes up. Then really force a competition between guys like Hicks/Rosario who otherwise may be handed a spot. I think he may settle for a 1 year deal and I would do that over signing a mid 30's guy. I would prefer a longer term signing than one year for Masterson. I like Ervin Santana. Of the five guys we have penciled in right now for 2015 or penciled in for 2016, plans will change. Guys will get hurt or at least one guy we think will be good will not be good. He would provide a talent upgrade as well, which is needed.
  25. tobi0040
    True, but when you are ten years behind you will always be behind. It is very hard to jump ahead 10 years and then keep up with the changes going on right now. Goin joined the twins in ticket sales in 2000. Then was major league administration in 2009, then baseball research in 2011 according to Beradino. It also takes a GM that is in the know and coordination between the departments. This article suggests the Twins were seeking ground ball pitchers in 2012 and the stats pointed them to Worley, Pelfrey, and Correia. http://www.twincities.com/ci_23098690/minnesota-twins-join-moneyball-era-behind-mystery-man
×
×
  • Create New...