Jump to content
Our free agent ranking is up to 100 names, and now you can filter by player position! Click here to check it out! ×
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

Minnesota Twins News, Rumors & Analysis

Minnesota Twins Videos

2026 Minnesota Twins Top Prospect Rankings

2022 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

Minnesota Twins Trade & Free Agent Rumors

Minnesota Twins Fan Guides & Resources

2023 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

The Minnesota Twins Players Project

2024 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

2025 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

2026 Minnesota Twins Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

Forums

Blogs

Events

Store

Downloads

Gallery

Everything posted by gunnarthor

  1. gunnarthor
    If the big concern is the Twins didn't add a LOOGY, they'll be fine. They have enough in-house options to piece together a strong bullpen. As of now, the bullpen looks to be Perkins, Jepsen and May in the main roles. They have Fein, Tonkin, Pressly (who I like), Meyer plus possibly two starters who didn't make the rotation to play with.
  2. 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.
  3. gunnarthor
    Hicks didn't make the team out of ST last year. I'm not sure how CF will shake out in April - although I expect Buxton will get it - but over the entire year, I think CF will be better than last year.
  4. gunnarthor
    Centerfield. But, owing to earlier posts, how about I revamp and instead of saying "upgrade" I will simply say that the 2016 Twins CF will be better than the 2015 Twins CF.
  5. gunnarthor
    How about if instead of saying "upgraded", I said "better" at X positions. Would that make it easier/less confusing?
  6. gunnarthor
    The upgrades that the Twins made are from the 2016 season over the 2015 season. We all know how you feel on the Sano to the OF move. I don't care anymore. But the central point - that the team has upgraded at 4 positions over last year is true. Maybe it's easier to put this way. Question 1, last year, the Twins DH's put up a .759 OPS. Do you think the 2016 Twins DH's (led mostly by Park) can best that number? Last year, the Twins RFers put up a .239/.283/.400 line. Do you think the 2016 Twins RFers (led mostly by Sano) can best that number? If you said yes, it's an upgrade. If you said no, it's not an upgrade. If you said the Twins should keep Sano at DH, you are making up a new argument that is not what we are discussing.
  7. gunnarthor
    Yeah, I think we're arguing semantics here. Twins are better positioned at DH in 2016 than they were in 2015. Twins are better positioned at RF than they were in 2015. Those are true. What is not true is that the Twins were going to use Sano as the 2016 DH - they said repeatedly that they weren't going to keep him out of the field.
  8. gunnarthor
    We're looking at whether the 2016 team has upgraded over the 2015 team. The 2015 team (as a whole) didn't produce much out of the DH position. I think what you and Levi are attempting to argue is that Sano would be a better DH and the Twins should leave him there and worry about other stuff. That may be a valid point but it's not quite what this discussion is. Park should be able to replicate and improve on the overall production we got from the DH position last year. Also, Sano was never going to be just the DH. The team was pretty adamant about making him play in the field. He's too young to become just a DH at this point. Longterm, I still think he ends up at firstbase but he can hold down RF for a few years.
  9. gunnarthor
    Mostly Vargas.
  10. gunnarthor
    I guarantee if we had Latos, people would be bitching about blocking Berrios, May and Duffey.
  11. gunnarthor
    Actually, 44 according to fangraphs. But that's beside the point. That's steamer's projection. As bluechipper noted, Twins DH's line was substantially below that - .759 OPS. He should hit enough to be an upgrade. Which is what my original post said. I happen to think he'll be substantially better than the .759 line but we'll see.
  12. gunnarthor
    We're better than the Sox.
  13. gunnarthor
    Steamer has a .254/.327/.479 line. That's doable. I'm not quite sure why there's all this pessimism around him. Jung Ho Kang stepped in and did a better line last year. Park should be a good hitter.
  14. gunnarthor
    Nah, that's why I specifically said "assuming Park works out." If Park catch match his low projections from steamer, that's an actual upgrade over Twins DH production last year. His bat isn't as good as Sano's (obviously) but a solid DH all year would be an upgrade.
  15. gunnarthor
    OR, we added a new starting catcher who should upgrade our catching production. Our rotation was middle of the road in nearly all offensive categories and has reason for positive regression and young arms to bolster it. Sano is a fine athlete who can probably play RF as well as Arcia. And probably better. Our rookie LF was worth over 2 WAR despite a low obp. They'll be fine. Sure they could upgrade (specifically at first base) but they have a pretty good young core to build on. They'll be fine.
  16. gunnarthor
    I don't know - seems like the Twins did ok. They upgraded at C, DH, CF and RF (assuming Park works out). They have a good young pieces to plug in (that they shouldn't block) and enough pieces to fix the pen. They'll be fine.
  17. gunnarthor
    Does anyone have any rumors about what the Twins are planning to do on the international front this year?
  18. gunnarthor
    This got interesting. I assume you'll keep track of the bets. I'll take the over.
  19. 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.
  20. gunnarthor
    Right, but does the base run formula use 10 runs = 1 Win or is it closer to 19 as the deviation point?
  21. gunnarthor
    Apparently, I didn't respond or it got deleted. I didn't think it was that bad. Based on a bunch of these threads, I think one of us is reading Gleeman's tweet incorrectly and leave it at that.
  22. 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.
  23. 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.
  24. 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.
  25. 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.
×
×
  • Create New...