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

Forums

Blogs

Events

Store

Downloads

Gallery

Everything posted by gunnarthor

  1. gunnarthor
    Because baseball is designed to by cyclical. Unless teams can spend their way out of it, the system of player acquisition is specifically designed to punish successful teams. (And, for years, the system to acquire international talent was designed to punish poor teams). Nothing about the Twins current 4 losing years is anything but normal compared to the rest of the AL. As to Parker's work, I don't dispute that they have had some bad drafts. I do think the conclusions and methodology are weak and were designed with the conclusion already made.
  2. gunnarthor
    I want Hicks to start at AAA but it doesn't look like it'll happen. So, let's see what the positives are. For all his warts, Hicks does get on base pretty well. He had a .341 OBP for the season and about a .350 after his return. That's pretty darn good. Ignoring everything else, if you were told your #8 hitter would have a .350 OBP and play adequate defense in CF, you'd take that, right? It amazes me that Hicks has so little pop in his bat and I imagine it has to do with him not feeling right at the plate. Maybe he'll feel better around Molitor and Hunter than he did with Gardy. But I'm pretty sure we're going to find out. I think he and Schafer are the type of guys the Twins, in a rebuild, should take a gamble on. Former top prospects who are still young enough to break out. And Buxton will be up by midseason anyway.
  3. gunnarthor
    Oh, right, I forgot the Giants. My bad.
  4. gunnarthor
    I think you can criticize the Twins for a lot of things but this doesn't seem like one of them. If they were drafting for need, they would have taken Gausman, Appel or Zimmer over Buxton. Draft cheap? Sure. Stay away from certain agents? Sure. Refuse to go over slot? You bet. But not draft for need. It just doesn't work in baseball. By the time a guy is ready, the need for the ML club is probably different.
  5. gunnarthor
    These are also true factual statements that also mislead the reader Since the Pohlads took over the Twins, only the large market Yankees and Red Sox have won more World Series. Over the last 17 years, Astros first round picks have amassed a total of 8 WAR. The Arizona Diamondbacks have the fewest losses in MLB history. At this point, I think we're just talking past each other. I do think that the Twins drafts should be examined but picking arbitrary endpoints - after Garza, before Buxton - confirms the results you are looking for rather than a fair look at draft history. And, as I already pointed out, it lets you whitewash the good 07 and 09 drafts.
  6. gunnarthor
    Again, that makes a statement that isn't true (insert Mark Twain quote here). The 07 draft (Revere) and 09 (Gibson) were good picks. You are over weighing the failures of the 08 and 10 draft to paint too broad a brush. And it overvalues the earlier drafts as players from your arbitrary end point are still developing or amassing value. There are some issues with the drafts but this isn't really telling us much compared to the misinformation it shows.
  7. gunnarthor
    Looking at only a small frame of time can distort how we look at things. Nearly all teams have cyclical results, esp if you are looking at 5 or 6 year periods and/or only a part of the draft process (which is only part of the development system). The problem with saying the Twins first round draft picks were bad from 06-11 is 1) they weren't - both Revere and Gibson were good picks and Hicks still might be and 2) it ignores the entire drafts. Looking at in a more reasonable light would suggest that the 07 and 09 drafts were good and that Johnson's drafts strategy might not be ideal.
  8. gunnarthor
    Under the old system, certain teams absolutely went over the recommended slot a lot. Boston probably did it the most but Detroit got Porcello (a top end talent who dropped) one pick in front of us. By 2010, I think the majority of teams went over slot, while the Twins didn't - Carl Pohlad was very loyal to Selig on that issue, as was the Mets owner. It was a really contentious issue on most message boards for a while. Players like Span and Revere were seen as "safe" picks - both of those picks were panned almost immediately from prospect gurus.
  9. gunnarthor
    But I'm not sure if this isn't an oversimplification (or even fair to say they whiffed for six straight years b/c they didn't). We aren't looking at entire drafts, just the first round - which varies in number of selections each year. The end points are arbitrary (although I do think looking at Johnson's drafts would be more valid b/c we see a team change their draft philosophy). Looking at the 06-11 first round picks ignores the value the team got out of Valencia and Dozier. It also ignores the value they got from trading some of those players they drafted. And there are still some players in those drafts that could end up helping the team. A few years ago, people used to complain about the 04 draft but now that Plouffe has emerged, it doesn't look as bad. And you'd have to look at all teams drafts to figure things out. I do think it's safe to say that the Twins bombed the 06 draft, just as the Cards bombed the 04 draft. 07 and 09 seem like pretty good drafts though, considering where they were picking. 08 and 10 don't look good although Hicks and Rosario could change them. It's probably too early to call 11 a bust but it looks like the best case scenario of that draft would be a utility infielder and maybe a few relievers.
  10. gunnarthor
    What was the Twins median pick? How many teams behind them did better?
  11. gunnarthor
    Yeah, I'm not as worried about it as I think the beginning and end points are somewhat arbitrary and it doesn't take into account the different types of players drafted (HS pitcher, prep bat etc) or injuries but I do think it's fair to look at Johnson's drafts (08 on) as opposed to what we were doing before. Johnson has made a strong push for flamethrowers whereas Radcliff was much more likely to draft the college control arm. I preferred the Radcliff way but I'm in the minority. But fireballers means you have to take your shots on guys like Hunt and they don't always work out. (And I know it's an oversimplification - Johnson did take Wimmers and Radcliff did take Garza, for instance, but their drafts did have those tendencies).
  12. gunnarthor
    It seemed people hated the Twins strategy of drafting under Radcliff, too. So Johnson decided to go after flamethrowers instead. I preferred Radcliff's strategy of grabbing college pitchers like Baker, Slowey etc. Alex Wood and his 90 mph fastball would have looked good in the second round. IIRC, the high school pitcher the Twins were linked to in 2012 was Rocheseter's Mitch Brown. But they passed on him and he struggled his first few years. Had a bit of a better year last year in low A but still far away. I don't have a problem with letting relievers start for as long as they can (Klaw has said the same thing). First, the Twins have a ton of potential impact bullpen arms so I'm not worried about which ones are actually used. Second, Johnson is hoping that one or two of these relievers can turn into a solid starter - or better. Individually, the odds are against them but as a large group (he drafted a bunch more in 2014), perhaps it works. I think the Rangers have had a little success moving solid relievers into starters. And lastly, the return on picks in the range the Twins were drafting relievers isn't particularly good. If they get one solid reliever out of the draft to go along with Buxton and Berrios, it's a great draft.
  13. gunnarthor
    I don't think that sways many people - Steamer usually predicts low. In fact, they predicted 6 pitchers to be above 4 WAR and only 3 to pitch 200 innings (unless they haven't issued all players/teams yet. I confess to not caring). Hughes' projection is the 29th best WAR in MLB.
  14. gunnarthor
    I think the point he's trying to make is that some stats are predictive and some stats tell us what happened. FIP isn't a very good predictive stat although you can argue that the ingredients in FIP are. That's why the changes in those rates might better explain Hughes outside of Yankee stadium. Most of the recent articles on fangraphs go in that general direction - "he's a good pitcher but real changes have made him better, etc, etc". I don't think anyone rationally expects him to be a 6 WAR pitcher again but he shouldn't fall back to the 2 WAR Yankee pitcher either.
  15. gunnarthor
    Yeah, I think Hughes might have similar value this year although it might look slightly different. Fangraphs has had a number of articles on Hughes as of late. I think most everything can be summed up as "Hughes is a good pitcher" and the rest is semantics. He should throw another 210 innings for us this year and be pretty good.
  16. gunnarthor
    I was an immigration attorney for a decade or so and one of the really interesting things (at least to me) was that many of my clients signatures looked different if they were signing it in Spanish or English, despite it being the same name and alphabet. You'd never think it was the same person's signature.
  17. gunnarthor
    Nice deal for the Twins and it lets Hughes get one more big shot at FA when he's 32. Good for both of them.
  18. gunnarthor
    I thought he passed the eye test in general but he did have some perplexing bad games where everything seemed to drop around him. His arm is legit, for sure.
  19. gunnarthor
    I think Hicks should start the season in AAA and stay there until the bat comes around. Maybe give up switch hitting (although at this late stage I really don't think it'll help). But the Twins should not expect anything out of him until he hits more.
  20. gunnarthor
    I like this pick, I might have gone with Cody Martin over Graham. Still, I like the idea of seeing what we might have in Graham. A pitcher coming back from injuries does have some red flags but if he does come all the way back, he could be pretty good. If not, he could be a strong pen piece.
  21. gunnarthor
    http://mlb.mlb.com/mlb/news/prospects/index.jsp The easy way to access their prospect stuff is to just type in www.mlbpipeline.com - that's the front page for all the minor league stuff, including the rule v draft.
  22. gunnarthor
    That said, Berardino tweets that the Twins are on Graham
  23. gunnarthor
    My guess is that the Twins take DeShields if he's there when they pick, if not, they'll nab one of the Atlanta pitchers (Martin or Graham).
  24. gunnarthor
    Cody Martin - also from Atlanta - could be a good fit. Twins drafted him previously. He put up pretty solid numbers in AAA last year (10th in k/9 among starters) and the Twins would have seen him a few times since he's in the international league.
  25. gunnarthor
    Of the FA pitchers, I'd be ok with Masterson. I'd rather go with May, Meyer, Milone than the others. No way should Liriano come back. He's the crazy ex-girlfriend. You broke up for a reason, don't forget that. Ryan could also make a trade or two to add to the pitching depth (in fact, I wouldn't be surprised if the Twins added Cody Martin in the rule v draft and gave him every opportunity to win the 5th spot).
×
×
  • Create New...