Jump to content
Twins Daily
  • Create Account

gunnarthor

Old-Timey Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • 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

  1. gunnarthor
    I think the problem is the valuation and weight you put on your math numbers.
  2. gunnarthor
    David Schoenfeld at ESPN is a pretty constant critique of the Twins and often focuses on May being the lucky month. I posted it elsewhere but I don't really think the clustering of wins means much except to a narrative. I think you can certainly say that the Twins won more games than they were supposed to based on the RS v RA but even that should be given a grain of salt. The first week of the season was so bad it actually colored the results for the entire year. -28 RS in the first week, +24 for the rest of the year. Obviously, most teams will look better if you take out their worst week but that was still a really sizeable difference. In any event, I think the Twins team changed considerably over the year so I think the talent level we have is better than what the RS/RA suggests. And that talent should improve. That's generally why I'm optimistic about this season.
  3. gunnarthor
    Nice list, Seth.
  4. gunnarthor
    Hm, not sure what happened there. They projected 70 wins, and were off by 13.
  5. gunnarthor
    I don't think anyone disagrees with this point. I think the area of contention is how much of the Twins success is due to that. It is often mentioned that the Twins were lucky in May last year bu the numbers don't really suggest that - they hit the snot out of the ball in May. Their lucky month was actually August, at least runs-wise. The Twins weren't really unique clustering a lot of wins in a short period, which is what I think is part of this unstated criticisms of last years team. Houston started the season 30-17. The Twins best 47 game streak started about 4 weeks later and they went 27-20. Outside of those 47 game runs, both teams were 56-59 the rest of theway.
  6. gunnarthor
    I guarantee if we had Latos, people would be bitching about blocking Berrios, May and Duffey.
  7. gunnarthor
    We're better than the Sox.
  8. gunnarthor
    Yeah, I don't think that part is all the controversial. The Twins overachieved some last year (how much depends on how much you want to credit to luck or whatever) and they have a young group of players who may take a step back or might just take off. There's a lot of possibilities. Should be a fun season. Whether you want to put any weight on a system like PECOTA is up to you. I think they've shown they are pretty unreliable to the point that they should be mocked. But others may differ.
  9. gunnarthor
    Right, but does the base run formula use 10 runs = 1 Win or is it closer to 19 as the deviation point?
  10. gunnarthor
    How much is "quite a bit"? Is that a runs created model? Are the off and def equal in value? (The formula link doesn't work). If I'm reading this correctly (and there's a really good chance I'm not), the Twins should have given up 31.6 runs more on defense than they did. Are we using the 10 runs = 1 win thing here? Interestingly, the common refrain is that the Twins were lucky in May by clustering their hits but that's not quite true. In May the Twins were 4th in runs scored buy also 5th in OBP, 3rd in slg and 4th in wOBA. They earned those runs. Their "lucky" month was actually August. 6th in runs but 14th in wOBA.
  11. gunnarthor
    I figure they'll be similar record wise again 79-82 wins but hopefully behind us. I love Lindor - I think he'll be the best short stop in the majors - and the rotation is good. Although I'd be surprised if those 4 give them 120+ starts again.
  12. gunnarthor
    Yeah, that was Gleeman's way of obscuring PECOTA's unreliability. If you look at it year by year it's a bit different - 2010 - projected 82 wins - off by 12 2011 - projected 83 wins - off by 20 2012 - projected 71 wins - off by 5 2013 - projected 66 wins - perfect 2014 - projected 71 wins - off by 1 2015 - projected 82 wins - off by 12 So they were pretty good at saying the Twins would suck in 2013 and 2014 (big gamble there), were in the ball park in 2012 and no where close in 2010, 2011 and 2015. But Gleeman's tweet tries to imply that PECOTA was nearly spot on for the six years.
  13. gunnarthor
    This gets said a lot but is simply not true. PECOTA's projected standings are usually off by 6 games per team every year. And their projected order of finish isn't much more reliable, even within their own division. Last year, in the AL, their projected final standings were off completely - they missed on the correct order of finish of all 15 AL teams. Not one right and they only got two teams within one placement of their final standings. They were off on the final record of each team by an average of 9 games and only 4 teams were they even within 5 games for.
  14. gunnarthor
    Well sure, this is just back of the napkin stuff but generally, I think our lineup is better and deeper than theirs - substantially so, actually. I like their front of the rotation more. Bullpens could go either way. But I think we're past a point where we can say they have the better roster "on paper." I just don't think they do.
  15. gunnarthor
    I'm not sure that's even true, though. I think the Twins have the advantage at most positions now. Although some of that is based on projection since we don't know how some of our young guys will do this year. But I'd rather have Park at DH than LaRoche. I like Dozier and Plouffe over Lawrie and Frazier. Escobar over Saldino. I like our OF of Rosario/Buxton/Sano a lot more than their OF. They have an advantage at first base but even catcher might be a draw. They certainly have a better front of the rotation.
  16. gunnarthor
    I will say that Jose Quintana might be the most underrated good pitcher in baseball. Something about soft tossing 90 mph lefties gets people to underrate them. But he's really good.
  17. gunnarthor
    Sale's good and Rodon will be good but ... man, that's a tough roster to get excited about. I would think they are more likely to win 71 than 90. I wouldn't be surprised if they looked at moving Abreu at some point this season.
  18. gunnarthor
    The best strike out pitchers the Twins have had over Ryan's years were obtained through trades and rule v not the draft. Again, I don't really care about what a good pitcher looks like. We need good pitchers period. If it's a Radke, great. If it's Santana, great. Anyway, if I had a draft strategy (and it's good that I don't), I would aim for upside with my first pick. Take an Aiken if he falls, for example. But I'd use a good chunk of my other first day picks on a Radcliff like approach and draft the dreaded safe college pitchers like Baker, Joe Kelly, Drew Smyly, Tyson Ross etc.
  19. gunnarthor
    Either your sarcasm meter isn't working or I wasn't artful. Could go either way. I was trying to stuff the notion that Radcliff didn't pursue front of the rotation type starters so he "wasted" the Garza pick. I dunno know. It's been a long day.
  20. gunnarthor
    Yeah, it's so far out that all of these things will change but I'd be happy with a guy like Senzel or Delbec, college third basemen who might be quickly through the system.
  21. gunnarthor
    Fireball pitchers fail too. The Twins draft strategy has changed as to pitchers since Johnson took over and I think you can argue that his results haven't been nearly as good as Radcliff's were, even though Johnson takes the fireballers (of course, that's a simplistic view since Johnson took "safe" arms like Wimmers and Radcliff wasted picks on fireballers like Durbin and Garza). The Twins should aim to draft good pitchers - speed of their fastball shouldn't be a concern. Nola is a good pitcher (I'm still glad we took Gordon) and deserved to be a top pick, as he was. But if the best option at 16 is an Aaron Nola type, that's great. Take him.
  22. gunnarthor
    My take on the Twins not signing anyone is that the payroll is pretty close to tapped out, despite what the Pohlad's may claim.
  23. gunnarthor
    I'm pretty much ready to write them off. Their pitching was horrible last year and Zimmerman is a pretty overrated NL pitcher. Upton is a good slugger but he isn't enough. I think they'll finish last in the Central again.
  24. gunnarthor
    Yeah, obviously as many different plans is better. I have a small 401k right now with a full match from my employer. My wife will get a state pension. We have some IRAs as well. We also set up some 529 plans for our kids college funds which will (hopefully) pay a large portion of that down the road. We got lucky and paid off our mortgage early so we're managing to put away a pretty good amount each month. If not for those damn school loans (at 7.5% interest) ...
  25. gunnarthor
    Sadly, I'm a nonprofit attorney. A few years ago Congress passed a loan forgiveness program that would forgive your loans after you've worked at a nonprofit for 10 years and were paying off the debt while working. Last summer I learned that I was paying it off but under the wrong plan so all my years didn't qualify. (That was a really bad day). I had actually been paying MORE than I would have under the qualifying plan but it didn't matter. So my wife and I started planning how we'd pay off this 100k and decided to make a big payment out of our savings in March 2016 (after we had owned a certain stock for a year to get lower taxes). And now the our portfolio is tanking just as we're getting ready to actually use it. As I said, 'ow'. But I agree it is actually a good time to buy low on some things. Oil will eventually go back up. And some of the financial giants are a good price, too.** **that is not financial advice, that is an opinion. I repeat, that is NOT financial advice.
×
×
  • Create New...