Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

IndianaTwin

Verified Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    6,605

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    27

 Content Type 

Profiles

Minnesota Twins News, Rumors & Analysis

Minnesota Twins Videos

2026 Minnesota Twins Top Prospect Rankings

2022 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

Minnesota Twins Trade & Free Agent Rumors

Minnesota Twins Fan Guides & Resources

2023 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

The Minnesota Twins Players Project

2024 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

2025 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

2026 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

Forums

Blogs

Events

Store

Downloads

Gallery

Everything posted by IndianaTwin

  1. IndianaTwin
    Can’t believe how Counsell manages by spreadsheet. Won’t even let his starter go four innings. Pulls him after only 63 pitches. Won’t let him face Buxton a third time….
  2. IndianaTwin
    And on the bright side — no double play this inning!
  3. IndianaTwin
    Scoreboard “Player Trivia”: “Almost shares a name w/ a commonly used spice (Garlic).” Such insight!
  4. IndianaTwin
    But I don’t have THAT part of left field covered.
  5. IndianaTwin
    It tends to get panned on TD, but I’ve always liked it. Among other things, I’ve found it to one of the most accessible parks in MLB for my son with a physical limitation.
  6. IndianaTwin
    I’ve got left field covered.
  7. IndianaTwin
    Gabriel Moreno hit .276 when he was up for Toronto, and they won’t trade him. WIth him and Alejandro Kirk, it wouldn’t be surprising if Danny Jansen was available. He’s hitting way, way, way above his career numbers, which are slightly below average, but was pretty highly regarded when coming up. And he’s controllable.
  8. IndianaTwin
    I don’t think even a re-negotiated deal is a practical possibility. For the Twins to sign him requires them to spend $2.75 M more than another team. If the Twins come through with even a $5 M offer, Sano is likely to say, “No thanks, I’ll take the buyout money and try my luck at getting more than $2.25 M elsewhere.” And with the other options they have, I don’t see them offering even $5 M Realistically, though I like Sano and can still remember the yell I let out when he hit the slam against Cleveland a year ago, I agree that he may have a tough time getting an MLB contract. But some team could get a steal with a deal that’s heavily incentive driven.
  9. IndianaTwin
    I seem to remember you calling me out on that a week or so ago in Chicago. ?
  10. IndianaTwin
    Gonna have to disagree with the two of you on this one. Give me the classic hodge-podge.... PS: I like how Parker and Candelaria didn't even agree on the hat.
  11. IndianaTwin
    Looks like Danny Coulombe went on the 15-day IL on May 28. Moving him to the 60-day resolves the 40-man roster question, right? Also, Ober's 15-day IL was retroactive to June 2, so he can likely be switched as well to buy a little time and get things past the trade deadline.
  12. IndianaTwin
    That would be consistent with prior years. Last year, I went to the work of counting the number of July trades by the Twins and by all of MLB over the course of several years. What I found was that the Twins were considerably above average in the number of trades they made. Given where they are at in the standings, I think it’s more likely than not that they will be active traders.
  13. IndianaTwin
    A hearty "yes" to this post, Brandon. I have a feeling we may find out that catcher is the one exception, but there are a lot of teams who would love to have the "Sano problem," for example. A bunch of teams would be forced to rely on the hope of him coming back productively. In the Twins case, he's simply bonus, thanks to the production of guys you mentioned. Similarly, it hasn't been a backbreaker to have a productive, with good potential for more, rookie like Larnach go on the IL. I know I'm going to get myself in trouble for saying this, but I think you can carry some of the same observation to the rotation. I haven't gone to the work of checking, but I'm wondering how many teams have had only 21 games started by someone with an ERA+ under 95. That means more than three-fourths of our starts were by someone who is essentially league average or better. The White Sox, for example, have had 42. And much of that is because of depth. In Smeltzer/Ober/Winder, we've got 25 starts from guys who weren't in the opening day rotation and have an ERA+ of 95 or better. I'm guessing not many teams have that many. Now the bullpen...
  14. IndianaTwin
    What is your definition of "significant"? My experience has been that in statements of this nature, particularly when a "guarantee" is added, the definition of "significant" is typically "a little more than whatever they actually do." In other words, the writer often has already decided in advance whether the person will meet their expectations, and the answer is "no, they won't." Additionally, statements like this don't count the trades that were not made. Those are "significant" as well. Last winter, if a team had offered a good starting pitcher for Miranda and we said, "yes," we might have called that "significant." But if that offer had been Chris Sale for Miranda, it would have been "significant" to have said "no," but we would never have heard about it.
  15. IndianaTwin
    The bullpen has been bad, but calculating a percentage of save opportunities isn't really an accurate representation, because of how it treats "save opportunities." Take Kendall Graveman of the White Sox, for example. He shows up with 5 saves and 4 blown saves, which makes him look ineffective. It seems like only a 55.6 percent. The issue is that the four "blown saves" all came in innings prior to the ninth. Yes, they were "blown saves," because he was pitching in what would have been a save opportunity had he finished the game, but the likelihood of him actually doing so was slim, because Liam Hendricks probably would have gotten the ninth. But because he didn't get the save when he pitches well in the eighth and Hendricks finishes, those games don't help him in that 5 of 9 calculation. Said more simply, a reliever pitching the eighth can often get a "blown save" to count against him, but isn't given the opportunity to get a save to count for him. That's where the hold comes in. He has 14 of those. Those were times when he pitched in a "save situation," but someone else got the save (or someone else blew the game after him). In the case of Graveman, it's more helpful to say that he has had 19 "saves plus holds" in 23 "saves plus holds opportunities." That's 82.6 percent, which is a much better representation of how effective he has been. Make sense? Again, I agree that the record would be much better with a better bullpen. My post is more about the challenge of "save opportunities" as a way of measuring bullpen success.
  16. IndianaTwin
    Thanks for the clarification.
  17. IndianaTwin
    By the way, the 10 day IL has been switched back to 15 days.
  18. IndianaTwin
    I'm hoping Gordon is warming up.
  19. IndianaTwin
    The Kansas City-Omaha Royals would beg to differ on your Toronto ranking. ?
  20. IndianaTwin
    I don't disagree, but it also speaks to perspective. Last year, they started 14-28 and then went 59-61 the rest of the year, but hardly anyone remembers the latter.
  21. IndianaTwin
    I'm guessing the player would need to be on board with it as well. If not, I'm guessing the union picks up on it.
  22. IndianaTwin
    I know there's not a technical definition of "laugher," but it was enough of one for them to use a position player on the mound.
  23. IndianaTwin
    Just can't get enough of that spellbinding analysis...
  24. IndianaTwin
    I'll go with last Tuesday, 8-2 over these same opponents.
  25. IndianaTwin
    Given his experience with the Dodgers and the time needed to ramp up, the bullpen has been my expectation for whatever time he can provide this year. I think it's a no-brainer to go that route.
×
×
  • Create New...