Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account


Verified Member
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Original_JB

  1. Perhaps in the competitive balance award money there could be some sort of wins/payroll algorithm where if you aren't spending money and you aren't winning you get less than teams that aren't spending money and are winning. So put some sort of value on regular season wins. Keeps teams from eating too many bad contracts on injured/bad players just to reach some arbitrary 'floor'.
  2. And actually being favored in a game or series would be nice as well, as opposed to being a speed bump.
  3. Except it won't. If there are teams spending $200M+ a year on payroll, making a $50M payroll team spend $100M/yr isn't going to fly because truly, what is there to gain? Will (should) they be a incrementally better team? Should be. But MLB isn't a game of increments. You either qualify for the playoffs (and its $$$), or you don't. The only way the floor works is if they expand the playoffs to the point where it minimizes the financial risk of spending the money. Unless, of course, MLB goes "all in" and pools 100% of the television revenue and splits it evenly amongst the teams. Then you're talking bout enough money to restructure the entire league to a whole different pay structure (becomes a true "league" as opposed to a collection of independent contractors working under a pact).
  4. Why not go with a 4 year 'rolling average' type floor. That gives teams time/room to build for the 'windows' method many teams feel they must use.
  5. I would argue that the 'physical' talent is off the charts in today's game compared to any time in history, but also that the 'baseball' acumen is also at it's lowest point in history. How many guys can mash the ball or throw 105mph, but can't bunt, steal a base, throw to the correct place, etc. Used to be, ALL the players were making "heads up" plays, now it's talked about as a rarity.
  6. Back and forth on this one. We will see some tantalizing "look how good they can be" stretches, and some, "OMG, turn the dial" ones. The roller-coaster inconsistency of almost every player on the roster, and the lack of starting pitching has me splitting the difference on the poll question. I see 65-75 wins, max.
  7. The names that come to me from the days of listening to the games on 'CCO at night in bed are Goltz and Hisle.
  8. This was gleaned from a MLBTradeRumors article linking Robbie Ray to the Twins: "Minnesota is perhaps the most interesting of the new teams in the mix. Like the Tigers, the Twins are a revenue-sharing recipient and also the holder of a Competitive Balance Round pick, which could mitigate the draft capital they’d lose to sign Ray." Didn't the Twins shift from 'recipient' to 'donor' with the opening of Target Field? Have revenues dropped (or other teams' increased) to the degree we're back on the "take" side of things? I really don't have more, other than being pretty surprised if it is true.
  9. I only love this deal if there are 2 more "real" SP's to be signed/acquired by the Twins, otherwise, Pohlads/St.Peter signed the guy "the fans wanted", at a price 'they' liked and as such can consider their work 'done' outside of the retreads to fill out the rotation. You can't bring back a guy you already have with a shiny new contract and claim that you spent big money (like you would have with a free agent) and call it a day.
  10. That's the thing; for the money+player/prospect Segura would require for one year of service @$16M ($14.85M +$1M buyout), you could probably re-sign Simmons to a 2 year deal, figuring he is still great (not as good as at one time, but still) in the field, and most likely recovers somewhat at the plate. Doesn't cost you any prospects and gives you a controllable body at a reasonable rate at the deadline next year if things don't pan out. The question is, is he a good mix in the clubhouse? We've heard a variety of things this past season. Throw this idea completely out the window if there were personality clashes, aloofness, or whatever you want to call a "bad" teammate personality-wise.
  11. Not that I want him back, but did I miss an article somewhere where the Twins have stated they're moving on from him?
  12. Kirby Puckett. 1982: 65 games in the Rookie League; 1983: 138 games at A; 1984: 21 games at AAA and then came up and played 128 games for the Twins that same season. *young and inexperienced*
  13. Baldelli pulling Berrios at 84 pitches with a no-hitter going comes to mind. (and yes, I realize it's early in the season after a shortened season and he wants to be 'careful' with his pitchers, but still).
  14. Only problem with that is if you go and look at the actual data, looking at the top 30 SS's in innings played, outside of the top 2 and the last 1 in defensive runs saved, the difference between playing the 'best' and the 'worst' SS in MLB, is a difference of 1 run scored every 8 games. Also, since it is pretty universally agreed that they probably aren't bringing him back, you are saying the Twins will look foolish regardless.
  15. Can anyone give a good reason why they didn't unload him? God forbid this means they want to bring him back. Even then, that could have happened after the season was over. Just another straw for the camel I guess.
  16. Read the headline, thought about it for a few seconds and said to myself C-, read the article and saw you came to the same conclusion. The reason I went that 'high' is he did seem to keep the team from just going through the motions, and kept the clubhouse from imploding I guess; but from a "baseball" acumen, I guess I believe that you shouldn't be losing games because of poor managerial decisions, and we had a boatful of those.
  17. Think about who is doing the advertising. It is known as "selling hope", and the Twins have that skill running in perpetual motion. For all the touting, truly, how many "MLB Stars" have been developed and come out of the Twins organization over the last 25 years?
  18. Nice article. I've been watching his pitching from a number of articles/clips from around the web, and it appears to me that he's found an arm slot/rotation/angle for that fastball that from the batter's POV, his entire forearm and pitching hand "disappear" at one point in the motion, and then his release unfolds in a way that the hand and forearm are fully inline with his upper arm, which sort of hides the ball. Hard to describe, but it looks like the batter sees half the guy's arm disappear (the half with the ball), then the ball sort of pop straight out of the middle of his arm --already on the batter; you don't really see the arm "come around" as it were. It would make for odd ABs (sort of like knucklers just sort of mess with your head).
  19. If you do go to Tom Reid's, order the poutine. Don't question it, don't think about it, just get it.
  20. Problem is, players tend to be creatures of habit. In theory, while moving guys all over the field and up and down the batting order *shouldn't* affect their play (if they're capable of filling the role), it is quite obvious that it does. So, Rocco, if you're moving guys all over the field, at least try to let them bat in a consistent slot, and vice versa.
  21. This is where I wish there were an "I agree with this post, and I am upset about it (the content) too" EMOJI
  22. Made my thoughtful comment, now the cynical one; so when exactly is the non-refundable portion of the Season Ticket Holder deposits for 2022 due? If they can, Twins will talk the "all in for next year/not trading anybody" talk right up to the day after that money is due.
  23. Yeah, I kind of think Berrios is already gone (in his own mind). He wants market value. Twins won't go there, otherwise, deal would be done. When you start getting the 'I've been waiting six years for this' (free agency/freedom to maximize his value)comments, the Twins will need to be the high bidder --- which ain't happening.
  • Create New...