gunnarthor
-
Posts
13,019 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
20
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
2026 Minnesota Twins Draft Tracker: Picks & Bonuses
Forums
Blogs
Events
Store
Downloads
Gallery
Everything posted by gunnarthor
-
By holding onto Dozier, you don't make a bad deal. And, aside from one poster, no one here seems to think the Twins should have taken the Dodgers deal for De Leon, although some are suggesting that the Dodgers offer may have been more than, as Steve Adams described "and junk" but without any specifics.
-
Cots is the best website for baseball payroll. He has each team on an xcel worksheet as well.
-
They have the payrolls labeled 2016 but your site is almost certainly using 2015 payrolls. I just randomly compared the two sites on the Twins, Angels and Cardinals. They're using 2015 for 2016.
-
https://www.baseballprospectus.com/compensation/cots/national-league-central/chicago-cubs/
-
Well, the 1:1 is what's been reported. Steve Adams at mlbtraderumors said, in his chat, "The Twins aren't trading Dozier for De Leon and junk or just for De Leon straight up. Dodgers will either up their offer or the Twins will hold onto him. Right now, the latter looks considerably more likely." That pretty clearly indicates that the Dodgers deal is low. What is the risk of keeping Dozier? He has a four year track record of being a pretty good player. He's not turning into a pumpkin. He'll likely be an all-star this year. You think his value will plummet? Considering they aren't getting offers for his value now, it doesn't really matter. And you really seem to be overrating De Leon's chances, which is why teams don't trade guys like Dozier for just De Leon.
-
Who hasn't given them credit for trades? My god, man. Of course the trades mattered but comparing the Twins to a 200m payroll team is stupid. They have resources that the Twins don't that let's them do things the Twins can't. It's nice that the White Sox traded Sale. Bully for them. That doesn't mean the Twins should take a bad deal for Dozier. Since 2012 the Twins have traded pretty much everyone not nailed down. Only Span, Perkins and Dozier were players of a level to bring back huge returns. They kept Perkins. The Span 1:1 didn't work. They now have two years to deal with Dozier.
-
You think that but that doesn't mean you're right. Making a bad trade now - and we all agree it's a bad trade - isn't ok just because you don't think you'll get a better trade later. If you don't get your value, you hold him.
-
How did they get Hendriks? Because they had the money to extend Dempster. How did they get Chapman? Because they had 20m laying around. How did they get Russell? Because they signed Hammel in FA. Yes, they made some great trades but they were able to do them because signing a bad 4/50m pitcher didn't cripple their options. Constantly comparing a 200m+ payrolll team to the Twins is useless. And they didn't make bad trades. They held onto Samardzija when they didn't get an offer they liked in 2012 and saw him pitch worse in 2013.
-
This has come up several times but the Cubs highest sources of WAR this year came, in order, from FA signings, trades, draft picks.
-
I think the Cardinals aren't in because they have Wong locked in. Would the Twins take a Wong/Weaver deal? I'm not sure. I don't know what the future holds but I know that I don't want the Twins to make a bad deal now just because it's the only deal in town.
-
Not really that different. Sickels on Newcomb - "power lefty up to 97 with a plus curve and developing change-up, excellent strikeout and hit rates confirm the stuff but control and command remains shaky". mlbpipeline wrote "Newcomb does have to cut down on his walks to reach his ceiling, but as a Northeast guy who used to divide focus among two sports, he has more upside than your typical college arm. If the control improves, he could even outperform those Jon Lester comps." They had him pretty close to De Leon in their rankings (47 to 33) and his future grades were just as good. De Leon's stuff wasn't graded as well but they liked his command/control. Sounds like a Twins pitcher. Both got 55 FV grades. mlbpipeline reported De Leon's shoulder soreness and "shoulder inflammation."
-
So they're ahead of us after not having a winning season since 2012? That's some pretty strange logic. Atlanta's entering their 4th year of rebuilding. Not sure if they're ahead of us.
-
Sure, Santana won't be as good but it's unlikely that Santiago and Gibson are as bad, either. Those three combined for 66 starts, 390ip, 4.36 era and a 4.8 WAR. I think the three of them combined could improve on those numbers as a group. If pitch framing is a thing, Gibson is the type of pitcher who would most benefit.
-
Those guys still have high ceilings.
-
It's always fun seeing that a stock you own miss expected earnings and you see it's stock price go up. I guess that only missed by a little!
-
I'm not too sure how realistic their interest was but I liked the idea of Weaver and Flaherty from St Louis or Newcomb from Atlanta over De Leon. None of those pitchers had De Leon's ceiling but I trusted their floors a lot more. If I thought De Leon would need TJ surgery and come back, that's one thing. But shoulder soreness is such a red flag for me that I'd probably walk away from that guy.
-
The Cubs spent their way out of the cellar. The Astros had 6 losing seasons in a row - three worse than our worse year - and have topped out at 86 wins two years ago. The White Sox are the very definition of a team constantly winning 71-79 games, having done so in 6 of the last 9 years with two winning seasons (2010 and 2012) and a disaster year mixed in. The Phillies have had four straight losing seasons. They don't seem out of the rebuild yet. The Twins have a very strong offensive nucleus in place that just needs experience. There's no reason to think the Twins can't be like the 2001 Twins or the 2014 Astros. They have a lot of good pieces that should come together.
-
By this logic, the Twins should trade everyone no matter the return. There was no market for Plouffe, just like there was no market for Dozier. And yes, I was ok with keeping Perkins. If he had stayed healthy in 2015 we probably make the playoffs. That's the risk with pitchers but it was the right risk. There is no reason for the Twins to tank 2017 or not to care about it. We might be a 75 win team, we might be a 81 win team. We won't be a playoff team. That doesn't mean you throw out everything that's not bolted down.
-
Without doing anything, the Twins will get at least a quarter of their starts next year from people that didn't to it this year. Nolasco, Meyer, Dean, Albers and Milone combined for 45 starts, 282ip a 5.56 era and -1.2 WAR. They are all gone. If Molitor was smart (a big if, I know), Duffey wouldn't get 26 starts (-1.7 WAR) and May would. Berrios shouldn't be -1.6 WAR bad. So a rotation of Santana, Gibson, Santiago, Berrios and May/Hughes/Mejia is already better even without doing anything else. And if the Twins wanted to add a back end starter, they don't need to trade Dozier, they could sign Hammel or Tyson Ross. Moving Dozier for De Leon (admittedly, I'm the low man on him) is a waste of a resource.
-
You've been ripping the team pretty good in the other thread. The offers for Dozier haven't been sufficient. It's that simple. Move on. If you don't get a good deal, you don't take the bad deal. (And imagine the pessimism around Berrios if he had missed two months last year with injuries, including shoulder soreness. We'd be measuring him for a coffin). How does taking a bad trade move the needle in the future? I cannot get my head around how many times you've asked variations of this question without seeing the obvious problem of it and ignoring everyone who has pointed it out. The Twins haven't gotten a good offer for Dozier. Taking a bad deal doesn't make sense. If you don't get good deals you don't make bad trades. How is that so difficult to follow? The Twins have two top 100 prospects entering the rotation this year. They have two more at AA. They have the #1 pick in a college pitching deep draft. And that ignores Thorpe, Stewart and Romero. The 2019 rotation is probably going to be pretty good without moving Dozier. Moving Dozier MIGHT help but it might not. And moving Dozier will almost certainly make the 2017 and 2018 teams worse unless the return is ML ready NOW.
-
OK, I guess that's one person who was ok with the proposed deal.
-
This debate is somewhat surprising to me. Everyone agrees that the Dodgers offer of De Leon was not enough for Dozier. Not a single person has said that they think the FO should have taken a De Leon for Dozier swap. No one has suggested that their was an offer out there that was sufficient for the Twins that has been credibly reported. And yet people are ripping the FO for not trading him.
-
Yeah. The part where Sickels wrote "Players who exceeded rookie qualifications are not included. The list does include 2016 draftees" I read as "Players who exceeded rookie qualifications are not included. The list does not include 2016 draftees."
-
Guess that makes sense, Sickels is the high guy on De Leon but that list also excluded draftees. But it's probably a fair guess that Sickels will have him in his top 10 when he gets around to his 2017 list.
-
Who has De Leon as a top five prospect?
