Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

gocgo

Verified Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    1,621

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

 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 gocgo

  1. gocgo
    "Additionally, the Dodgers and Yankees are teams that are looking to stay below the $197MM luxury-tax threshold in 2018. As it stands, their projected 2018 salaries are $191MM and $162MM respectively. This means that signing Darvish will put the Dodgers well beyond the luxury-tax, and limits the Yankees to less than $25MM in average annual value (AAV) on Darvish’s contract in order to stay below" Pardon my math but wouldn't the Yankees be $35MM below the LT threshold? If they sign him for $30MM per year for 5, they would still be below the threshold. What am I missing?
  2. gocgo
    I'll lob this grenade into the mix. What if Mauer has an incredible 2018? .330 and 20+ dingers....along with a solid first base. He wants to stay in Minnesota for obvious reasons. Retiring after a year like that isn't likely. What do the Twins do then?
  3. gocgo
    Turning a single into a double won us a world series...Dan Gladden takes second on a blooper and a bounce.
  4. gocgo
    I'm not convinced that they would want THAT much. and keep in mind two things - first, they are prospects...many prospects do not succeed at the highest level. second, only 9 can be in the lineup at one time. having great prospects in the pipeline with a mediocre at best pitching staff is kind of a waste of resources.
  5. gocgo
    I'm kind of thinking of the opposite. We have a good core group of fielders set up for the future. What we don't have is a frontline pitcher that we can throw for the future. I see Archer as that guy. I see Sano moving to first after Mauer retires and it wouldn't shock me to see Dozier move to 3rd when that happens. I wouldn't want to trade away middle infield unless we feel we have excess. I don't like the idea of trading away any of our current outfielders as they really cover well and should continue to improve their hitting.
  6. gocgo
    If the plan is to grow from within while adding a few peripheral pieces here and there, then signing Darvish to a 6/160 deal makes no sense. If people didn't like the way Mauer's contract hamstrung us, signing a 31 year old pitcher to a long term contract isn't going to cure the pulled hammy.
  7. gocgo
    Hmmm. Big Sexy out...can you hear the drums Fernando? In. Just curious. When Target field was built, was there a nursing home constructed somewhere in the bowels of the stadium?
  8. gocgo
    Everything in moderation...that's what I say...except for good beer. Thanks moderators!
  9. gocgo
    I agree. So, do you think signing a 31 year old pitcher to a 6/160m deal would be a good thing for the Twins to do?
  10. gocgo
    Absolutely correct. That's why teams sign them to an extension (see Phil Hughes) and then let them go at the magic age. Full discolsure, I thought Santana's signing was bad and that worked out for us. I thought signing Phil Hughes to an extension at 28 wasn't a bad move and that didn't work out so well for us. Typically, starting in their early 20's their athletic ability tops out while their baseball IQ increases. Somewhere around their late 20's to early 30's, their athletic ability starts the downward curve and they become more reliant on their baseball IQ. Their ability to extend their career beyond age 30 really depends on their baseball IQ. So, if I were evaluating a pitcher north of 30, I would focus primarily on baseball IQ rather than fastball velocity, or the snap on their breaking ball as those can fall off quickly. Hopefully, they don't get dumb overnight.
  11. gocgo
    Definition of a "good free agent"...I think that is where we disagree. A good pitching free agent to me is 28 and in his prime. Not 31 and near or at the end of his prime. The odds of guys pitching with success past 32 is small. Why make a big bet on those small odds?
  12. gocgo
    No, notice that I said to a "long term deal" which is what Darvish would demand. Erv has worked out, but the math doesn't lie. 30+ years is not prime time and 4 years of not prime time for a lot of money is not a good investment.
  13. gocgo
    Making a "splash" for Darvish might be the beginning of drowning in a dead contract. I'm not a big fan of signing guys north of 30 to long term (greater than 2 years) contracts. Darvish is 31. It's just not worth the risk to me. Granted, Erv has worked out great, but I feel like he is the exception to the rule.
  14. gocgo
    I'm not skeptical about the pitching ability so much. It's the hitting part and he wants to play even when he isn't pitching. Can we afford to have a DH for 4 days that can't hit to get a guy who might be a great pitcher every 5th day? Dunno.
  15. gocgo
    I'm not skeptical because of Park...I'm going further back than that to a guy that was the star in Japan. He was considered the best player in Japan after hitting .346 and leading the league in hits (206) and runs scored (121). He was fast. He was a switch hitter. He was the man in Japan!...and failed miserably for the Minnesota Twins. Yes, he wasn't a pitcher. But DHing might not come so easily for Otani here as Nishioka's .346 equated to .226 over here. I'm skeptical, but might be willing to give it a try.
  16. gocgo
    Interesting idea on Iglesias. I know some want better starting pitching, but I think more and more teams are taking a different approach just because shutdown starting pitching is so tough to come by. KC kind of showed the blueprint two years ago and I think the Yankees are also taking this approach...they look to their starting pitching for 5-6 innings and just don't want to get blown up. After that, they bring in shutdown reliever after shutdown reliever and effectively shorten the game for the other team (basically, they have 5-6 innings to score). They win innings 6-8. I really think you are going to see more and more teams take this approach.
  17. gocgo
    Sorry so late on the response Chief. A couple of reasons. I think that Werth is a really big downgrade in defense. We are spoiled now defensively, but for what we would have to pay JW to give us Willinghammer type of defense on a fill in basis, I'd just as soon spend on pitching. I've never bought into the whole lefty on lefty thing. If you give a guy enough reps, I think they will adapt which is why I'd like to see them get their reps, take their hacks, and I think it pays off down the line.
  18. gocgo
    As far as getting Lackey for a veteran leader, I think Erv is probably a better example that I want my young guys to emulate. As far as getting Werth in the dugout to hit lefties, I'd rather let our young guys take their hacks and learn how to hit lefties rather than taking up a roster spot for that. I see Werth as wanting to stay in the NL.
  19. gocgo
    Hellickson on a 1 year deal. Ross to a minor league. Hard pass on Ubaldo. The only reason I would consider Hellickson is that I don't think Philly had a very good defense. And by that, I mean balls that could be caught by our outfield that didn't get caught in Philly. They fall as hits and affect the ERA of a pitcher, but if they are caught, the ERA plummets.
  20. gocgo
    In my perfect world, I want 8 relievers with the following roles: Closer A Closer B (left handed) 8th inning guy A 8th inning guy B 7th inning guy A 7th inning guy B Long reliever/6th inning guy A (left handed) Long reliever B/6th inning guy B (left handed) If my starter gets gets shelled early, too bad. Suck it up and get me 100 pitches/5 innings. I'll write off the game. I want my bullpen A and B to alternate days, recognizing that they may have to go back to back at times (extra innings, LOOGY situations, injuries, etc.). If a starter pitches into or beyond the 7th, those guys get an extra day off. Now for the most important part. Do your job well. Our goal is to shorten the game for the opposition. They get 5 innings to score. We get 8-9 innings to score. There's my formula for winning 60 percent of our games. Realistic? Probably not.
  21. gocgo
    It's interesting. I think of Darvish as a young gun...he's 31. I really do agree that the Erv Santana's of the world are rare and I've been vocal in the past about signing pitchers north of the magic 30 because the numbers don't lie. The dropoff is quick and seems to be irreversible. Relievers seem to be right around 32 when they hit the wall (Glen Perkins is a shining example). A mistake of offering a long term contract to a 31 year old is a mistake that has long term consequences to a smaller market team than to a larger market team. What are the thoughts of just focusing on bull pen arms? Keep 13 pitchers (5 starters) and 8 guys for 1-2 innings that can dominate. In the event that a starter gets hit around early, write off the game and have him go 5 innings or hits the pitch count. If a starter goes 6-7, you get to give a bullpen guy or two an extra days rest now and then. Otherwise, you have a platoon of 4 guys that work every other game from the pen. Yeah, I know it's a perfect world scenario, but it's at least a plan.
  22. gocgo
    Based on that, do you think Rosario is the guy to try to lock up now?
  23. gocgo
    Lock them all up at reasonable salaries with bonus $ for # of at bats. That way, they have incentive to stay healthy and the odds are if they are all healthy, the Twins have success. Look, Buxton is great, but Rosario has incredibly quick hands at the plate and a great arm to go with good speed. Rosario was good this year, but he has a chance to be elite. If we can lock up the outfield for many years, the pitching gets easier to come by. No pitcher wants to play with bad defense behind him and every pitcher wants to pitch with good defense behind him. Lock them up and then work on pitching.
  24. gocgo
    Good questions, but I'm not sure the team bought in last year...and then when things went off the rails soooo early and we were basically out of it in May. I think he has evolved as a manager and I an think the team has matured as well. I don't want to see them start over with a new guy when I think this team is on the verge of taking another step up. Buxton and Sano with an entire year of doing what they can do. Kepler has upside, Polanco has upside, and so does Berrios.
  25. gocgo
    I disagree and here's why. If you look at the season that just wrapped up, the Twins defense improved a lot and it's been documented that Molitor emphasized it early and often in spring training. When management traded away pitching before the deadline, Molitor united the clubhouse - "No retreat. No surrender". They played hard for him. It was the clubhouse, including Molitor, against management trying to prove them wrong and they did. If you replace Molitor with one of their guys, that guy would have already lost the clubhouse before they started. These guys have a bond with Molitor now. They will play for him.
×
×
  • Create New...